Jane I. Smith

1.4k citations
31 papers · 675 · h-index 11

Impact in

Papers in

Jane I. Smith

28 papers receiving 501 citations

Peers

Jane I. Smith
Comparison fields: 5 of 66
  • Political Science and International Relations 256
  • Sociology and Political Science 462
  • Religious studies 41
  • Gender Studies 76
  • Health 68
Replace Lori G. Beaman with:
Lori G. Beaman Canada
P. Steven Sangren United States
Abdelmalek Sayad France
Albert Memmi
Irene A. Bierman United States
Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im United States
Sophie Gilliat‐Ray United Kingdom
Paul A. Silverstein United States
A. Javier Treviño United States
Beth Baron United States
Jane I. Smith relative to Lori G. Beaman Canada Lori G. Beaman's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.4×
Lori G. Beaman · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Jane I. Smith

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Jane I. Smith's research. 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 Jane I. Smith with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jane I. Smith more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Jane I. Smith

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jane I. Smith. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Jane I. Smith. The network helps show where Jane I. Smith may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 22 scholars most cited alongside Jane I. Smith, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Jane I. Smith Line = papers co-authored together Jane I. Smith links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 31 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1999176
2
Islam in America
1999102
3 200288
4 200658
5 198138
6 199836
7 198333
8 200726
9 198918
10 199417
11 198214
12 200910
13 19799
14 19808
15 19838
16 19866
17
An historical and semantic study of the term "islām" as seen in a sequence of Qurʾān commentaries
19756
18 19794
19 20053
20 19983

About Jane I. Smith

Jane I. Smith is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Political Science and International Relations, Education, Archeology and Religious studies, having authored 31 papers that have together received 675 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Islamic Studies and History (15 papers), Education and Islamic Studies (9 papers), Religion, Society, and Development (9 papers), Archaeology and Historical Studies (7 papers), Historical and Linguistic Studies (6 papers), Religion and Society Interactions (4 papers), Biblical Studies and Interpretation (4 papers) and Marriage and Sexual Relationships (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Political Science and International Relations (256 citations), Sociology and Political Science (462 citations), Religious studies (41 citations), Gender Studies (76 citations) and Health (68 citations). Jane I. Smith has collaborated with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and Indonesia. Frequent co-authors include Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad, John L. Esposito, Kathleen N. Moore, Claude A. Clegg, Michael Dunn, Joseph B. Tamney, Mahmoud M. Ayoub, Malcolm C. Elliott, John L. Esposito and Gerardo Martí. Their work appears in journals such as The Muslim World, Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion and Harvard Theological Review.

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact