Kate Nash

2.4k citations
58 papers · 1.1k · h-index 19

Impact in

Papers in

Kate Nash

53 papers receiving 958 citations

Peers

Kate Nash
Comparison fields: 5 of 96
  • Communication 199
  • Human-Computer Interaction 97
  • Sociology and Political Science 585
  • Gender Studies 106
  • Political Science and International Relations 242
Replace Bella Dicks with:
Bella Dicks United Kingdom
Edgar Gómez Cruz Australia
Ronald Bogue United States
Göran Bolin Sweden
John Ellis United Kingdom
Roland A. Champagne United States
Faye E. Dudden United States
Stuart Ewen United States
Sarah Sharma Canada
Catherine Porter United Kingdom
Kate Nash relative to Bella Dicks United Kingdom Bella Dicks's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.4×
Bella Dicks · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Kate Nash

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Kate Nash

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Kate Nash. 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 Kate Nash. The network helps show where Kate Nash may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 9 scholars most cited alongside Kate Nash, 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 Kate Nash Line = papers co-authored together Kate Nash links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 58 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2007104
2 201797
3 200972
4 200163
5 201262
6 200856
7
Contemporary Political Sociology
200046
8
Readings in contemporary political sociology
200043
9 201842
10
Contemporary Political Sociology: globalization, politics, power
201034
11 200134
12 201631
13 201431
14 199631
15 200926
16
New Documentary Ecologies: Emerging Platforms, Practices and Discourses
201425
17 201524
18 201122
19 201418
20 200316

About Kate Nash

Kate Nash is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Political Science and International Relations, Law, History and Economics and Econometrics, having authored 58 papers that have together received 1.1k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics (11 papers), Cinema and Media Studies (10 papers), Law in Society and Culture (6 papers), Human Rights and Development (6 papers), Gender Politics and Representation (4 papers), Foucault, Power, and Ethics (4 papers), Digital Games and Media (4 papers) and Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Communication (199 citations), Human-Computer Interaction (97 citations), Sociology and Political Science (585 citations), Gender Studies (106 citations) and Political Science and International Relations (242 citations). Kate Nash has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. Frequent co-authors include John Corner, Craig Hight, Vikki Bell, Alan Scott, Edwin Amenta, Gholam Khiabany, Julian Petley, Des Freedman and Anne Marie Smith. Their work appears in journals such as Sociology, Studies in Documentary Film, Media Culture & Society, Theory Culture & Society and Citizenship Studies.

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