Stephen Pender
Impact in
-
- Historical Philosophy and Science
- Anthropology top 10%
- Historical and Literary Studies
- Classical Antiquity Studies
Papers in
- History 8
- History of Medicine Studies 4
- Renaissance and Early Modern Studies 2
-
- Historical Philosophy and Science 4
- Co-authors
- Giles W. Boland (1 shared paper)Frank J. Thornton (1 shared paper)Stuart M. Lyon (1 shared paper)J. F. Fielding (1 shared paper)Patrick O’Kelly (1 shared paper)Michael Courtney (1 shared paper)Elizabeth Rajan (1 shared paper)Brendan McAdam (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- Sixteenth Century Journal (3 papers)Clinical Radiology (2 papers)Philosophy and Rhetoric (2 papers)Medical History (1 paper)The Economic History Review (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- CanadaIrelandUnited States
In The Last Decade
Stephen Pender
23 papers receiving 187 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 66
- History and Philosophy of Science 36
- Anthropology 48
- History 52
- Philosophy 43
- Classics 13
Countries citing papers authored by Stephen Pender
This map shows the geographic impact of Stephen Pender'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 Stephen Pender with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stephen Pender more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen Pender
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen Pender. 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 Stephen Pender. The network helps show where Stephen Pender may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 16 scholars most cited alongside Stephen Pender, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 27 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1998 | 54 | |
| 2 | 2004 | 31 | |
| 3 | 2002 | 22 | |
| 4 | 1998 | 20 | |
| 5 | 2003 | 20 | |
| 6 | 2006 | 14 | |
| 7 | 1993 | 14 | |
| 8 | 1999 | 13 | |
| 9 | 2005 | 11 | |
| 10 | 2007 | 11 | |
| 11 | 2012 | 9 | |
| 12 | 2009 | 8 | |
| 13 | 2010 | 6 | |
| 14 | 2005 | 3 | |
| 15 | 1965 | 3 | |
| 16 | Signs of Interiority, or Epistemology in the Bodyshop | 2005 | 3 |
| 17 | 2009 | 2 | |
| 18 | 2010 | 2 | |
| 19 | An Interview with David Harvey | 2007 | 1 |
| 20 | 1995 | 1 |
About Stephen Pender
Stephen Pender is a scholar working on History, History and Philosophy of Science, Literature and Literary Theory, Anthropology and Surgery, having authored 27 papers that have together received 253 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include History of Medicine Studies (4 papers), Historical Philosophy and Science (4 papers), Historical and Literary Studies (3 papers), Renaissance and Early Modern Studies (2 papers), Folklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies (2 papers), Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment (2 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (2 papers) and Literature: history, themes, analysis (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in History and Philosophy of Science (36 citations), Anthropology (48 citations), History (52 citations), Philosophy (43 citations) and Classics (13 citations). Stephen Pender has collaborated with scholars based in Canada, Ireland and United States. Frequent co-authors include Giles W. Boland, Frank J. Thornton, Stuart M. Lyon, J. F. Fielding, Patrick O’Kelly, Michael Courtney, Elizabeth Rajan, Brendan McAdam, M. J. Lee and Hugh Kearney. Their work appears in journals such as Sixteenth Century Journal, Clinical Radiology, Philosophy and Rhetoric, Medical History and The Economic History 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.