Philosophical Perspectives

544 papers and 12.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 544 papers published in Philosophical Perspectives in the last decades have received a total of 12.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Philosophical Perspectives usually cover Philosophy (377 papers), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (291 papers) and Cognitive Neuroscience (157 papers) specifically the topics of Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (299 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (283 papers) and Philosophical Ethics and Theory (129 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Philosophical Perspectives are Kit Fine, Gilbert Harman, Roger M. White, Jaegwon Kim, Stewart Cohen, William P. Alston, Peter van Inwagen, James M. Joyce, Ruth Garrett Millikan and Sydney Shoemaker.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Philosophical Perspectives

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Philosophical Perspectives. 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 Philosophical Perspectives.

Countries where authors publish in Philosophical Perspectives

Since Specialization
Citations

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