Michigan Historical Review

616 papers and 4.0k indexed citations i.

About

The 616 papers published in Michigan Historical Review in the last decades have received a total of 4.0k indexed citations. Papers published in Michigan Historical Review usually cover Sociology and Political Science (207 papers), Marketing (116 papers) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (115 papers) specifically the topics of American History and Culture (116 papers), American Environmental and Regional History (115 papers) and Race, History, and American Society (106 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Michigan Historical Review are Robert A. Burnham, Thomas J. Sugrue, John D. Haeger, William Cronon, Mary Pattillo‐McCoy, Kathleen M. Blee, Victoria W. Wolcott, Richard W. Thomas, Brenda J. Child and Timothy B. Tyson.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Michigan Historical Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Michigan Historical Review. 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 Michigan Historical Review.

Countries where authors publish in Michigan Historical Review

Since Specialization
Citations

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