The Antitrust Bulletin

1.1k papers and 13.4k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.1k papers published in The Antitrust Bulletin in the last decades have received a total of 13.4k indexed citations. Papers published in The Antitrust Bulletin usually cover Economics and Econometrics (561 papers), Strategy and Management (193 papers) and Law (114 papers) specifically the topics of Merger and Competition Analysis (420 papers), Digital Platforms and Economics (73 papers) and Global trade and economics (71 papers). The most active scholars publishing in The Antitrust Bulletin are James F. Moore, David B. Humphrey, Allen N. Berger, Randal C. Picker, Stephen A. Rhoades, Martha Starr‐McCluer, Kenneth G. Elzinga, John E. Kwoka, Timothy J. Brennan and Thomas F. Hogarty.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in The Antitrust Bulletin

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in The Antitrust Bulletin. 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 The Antitrust Bulletin.

Countries where authors publish in The Antitrust Bulletin

Since Specialization
Citations

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