Psychoanalysis and History

275 papers and 2.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 275 papers published in Psychoanalysis and History in the last decades have received a total of 2.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Psychoanalysis and History usually cover Clinical Psychology (132 papers), General Psychology (76 papers) and History (69 papers) specifically the topics of Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology (76 papers), Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications (71 papers) and Historical Psychiatry and Medical Practices (46 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Psychoanalysis and History are Sigmund Freud, John Forrester, Mark Solms, R. D. Hinshelwood, Ernst Falzeder, Stephen Frosh, James M. M. Good, Philip A. Kuhn, Jaap Bos and Matthew S. Davids.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Psychoanalysis and History

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Psychoanalysis and History. 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 Psychoanalysis and History.

Countries where authors publish in Psychoanalysis and History

Since Specialization
Citations

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