Philip Sheldrake
Impact in
- Health top 10%
- Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
- Religious studies top 2%
- Christian Theology and Mission
- Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Pentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Papers in
-
- Religion, Society, and Development 6
- Religion and Society Interactions 4
- Health 9
- Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology 9
- Journals
- Acta Theologica (1 paper)The Expository Times (1 paper)Religion and Theology (1 paper)Horizons (1 paper)Literature and Theology (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United Kingdom
In The Last Decade
Philip Sheldrake
31 papers receiving 209 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 57
- Health 86
- Religious studies 60
- Geography, Planning and Development 50
- Philosophy 41
- Sociology and Political Science 140
Countries citing papers authored by Philip Sheldrake
This map shows the geographic impact of Philip Sheldrake'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 Philip Sheldrake with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Philip Sheldrake more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Philip Sheldrake
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Philip Sheldrake. 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 Philip Sheldrake. The network helps show where Philip Sheldrake may publish in the future.
No co-authors to show.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 41 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Spirituality and History: Questions of Interpretation and Method | 1991 | 59 |
| 2 | 2001 | 52 | |
| 3 | 2012 | 26 | |
| 4 | Spirituality and theology: Christian living and the doctrine of God | 1999 | 21 |
| 5 | 2012 | 17 | |
| 6 | 2010 | 10 | |
| 7 | The Business of Influence: Reframing Marketing and PR for the Digital Age | 2011 | 9 |
| 8 | 2014 | 9 | |
| 9 | 2001 | 8 | |
| 10 | 2012 | 8 | |
| 11 | 2016 | 7 | |
| 12 | Spirituality and Theology | 1998 | 7 |
| 13 | 2007 | 7 | |
| 14 | 2017 | 6 | |
| 15 | 2008 | 5 | |
| 16 | 2012 | 5 | |
| 17 | The role of spiritual direction in the context of theological education | 1998 | 4 |
| 18 | 2003 | 3 | |
| 19 | 2011 | 3 | |
| 20 | 2007 | 3 |
About Philip Sheldrake
Philip Sheldrake is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Health, Religious studies, Geography, Planning and Development and Classics, having authored 41 papers that have together received 291 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology (9 papers), Religious Tourism and Spaces (7 papers), Christian Theology and Mission (6 papers), Religion, Society, and Development (6 papers), Religion and Society Interactions (4 papers), Religious Education and Schools (4 papers), Medieval Literature and History (3 papers) and Biblical Studies and Interpretation (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Health (86 citations), Religious studies (60 citations), Geography, Planning and Development (50 citations), Philosophy (41 citations) and Sociology and Political Science (140 citations). Philip Sheldrake has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Their work appears in journals such as Acta Theologica, The Expository Times, Religion and Theology, Horizons and Literature and Theology.
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.