Monthly labor review

1.4k papers and 17.0k indexed citations
i
.

About

The 1.4k papers published in Monthly labor review in the last decades have received a total of 17.0k indexed citations. Papers published in Monthly labor review usually cover Economics and Econometrics (262 papers), General Health Professions (163 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (148 papers) specifically the topics of Employment and Welfare Studies (137 papers), Labor market dynamics and wage inequality (127 papers) and Retirement, Disability, and Employment (105 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Monthly labor review are Mitra Toossi, Howard N. Fullerton, Daniel Hecker, Anne E. Polivka, Howard V. Hayghe, Constance Sorrentino, Steven Hipple, Jane Waldfogel, Thomas J. Nardone and Murray Gendell.

In The Last Decade

Monthly labor review

671 papers receiving 8.4k citations

Fields of papers published in Monthly labor review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Monthly labor 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 Monthly labor review.

Countries where authors publish in Monthly labor review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Monthly labor 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 Monthly labor review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Monthly labor 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
2026