Judgment and Decision Making

1.0k papers and 33.1k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.0k papers published in Judgment and Decision Making in the last decades have received a total of 33.1k indexed citations. Papers published in Judgment and Decision Making usually cover General Decision Sciences (597 papers), Cognitive Neuroscience (327 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (293 papers) specifically the topics of Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics (597 papers), Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies (254 papers) and Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (214 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Judgment and Decision Making are Jesse Chandler, Gabriele Paolacci, Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, Paul Slovic, Dan M. Kahan, Elke U. Weber, Andreas Glöckner, Ann-Renée Blais, Paul Rozin and Edward T. Cokely.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Judgment and Decision Making

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Judgment and Decision Making. 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 Judgment and Decision Making.

Countries where authors publish in Judgment and Decision Making

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Judgment and Decision Making. 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 Judgment and Decision Making with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Judgment and Decision Making 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