General Decision Sciences

61.0k papers and 2.5M indexed citations i.

About

61.0k papers covering General Decision Sciences have received a total of 2.5M indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics, Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies and Economic and Environmental Valuation and also cover the fields of Economics and Econometrics, Safety Research and Cognitive Neuroscience. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science and Cognitive Neuroscience. Some of the most active scholars covering General Decision Sciences are Daniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky, Richard H. Thaler, George Loewenstein, Richard L. Oliver, Matthew Rabin, Icek Ajzen, Paul Slovic, Gerd Gigerenzer and Colin F. Camerer.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about General Decision Sciences

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering General Decision Sciences. 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 General Decision Sciences.

Countries where authors publish papers about General Decision Sciences

Since Specialization
Citations

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