Philosophical Studies

5.2k papers and 56.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 5.2k papers published in Philosophical Studies in the last decades have received a total of 56.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Philosophical Studies usually cover Philosophy (2.4k papers), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (1.8k papers) and Cognitive Neuroscience (1.3k papers) specifically the topics of Philosophy and Theoretical Science (1.7k papers), Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (1.6k papers) and Philosophy and History of Science (805 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Philosophical Studies are Richard J. Arneson, Jonathan Schaffer, Mark Johnston, Jaegwon Kim, David Rosenthal, R. N. Boyd, Sharon Street, J. Michael Dunn, Mark Schroeder and Bas C. van Fraassen.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Philosophical Studies

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Countries where authors publish in Philosophical Studies

Since Specialization
Citations

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