Applied Psychology

223.6k papers and 7.3M indexed citations i.

About

223.6k papers covering Applied Psychology have received a total of 7.3M indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Behavioral Health and Interventions, Digital Mental Health Interventions and Optimism, Hope, and Well-being and also cover the fields of Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Social Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Sociology and Political Science. Some of the most active scholars covering Applied Psychology are Icek Ajzen, Richard M. Ryan, Edward L. Deci, Charles S. Carver, Albert Bandura, Scott MacKenzie, Philip M. Podsakoff, Roy F. Baumeister, Nathan P. Podsakoff and Jeong Yeon Lee.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about Applied Psychology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering Applied Psychology. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers covering Applied Psychology.

Countries where authors publish papers about Applied Psychology

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research in Applied Psychology. 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 about Applied Psychology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Applied Psychology 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 fields with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025