History and Philosophy of Logic

655 papers and 2.8k indexed citations i.

About

The 655 papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic in the last decades have received a total of 2.8k indexed citations. Papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic usually cover Philosophy (260 papers), History and Philosophy of Science (235 papers) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (216 papers) specifically the topics of Philosophy and Theoretical Science (209 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (146 papers) and History and Theory of Mathematics (128 papers). The most active scholars publishing in History and Philosophy of Logic are Alfred Tarski, John Corcoran, John Corcoran, Gregory Moore, Catarina Dutilh Novaes, Richard G. Heck, D. A. Bochvar, Merrie Bergmann, Giuseppe Primiero and I. Grattan‐Guinness.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic.

Countries where authors publish in History and Philosophy of Logic

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in History and Philosophy of Logic. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in History and Philosophy of Logic with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites History and Philosophy of Logic more than expected).

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar’s output or impact.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025