William E. Tolhurst
Impact in
- Philosophy top 2%
- Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art
- Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity
- Literature and Literary Theory top 10%
- Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics
- Narrative Theory and Analysis
Papers in
- Philosophy 12
- Philosophical Ethics and Theory 8
- Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics 4
- Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art 3
-
- Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics 4
- Narrative Theory and Analysis 1
- Co-authors
- Noah M. Lemos (1 shared paper)Samuel C. Wheeler (1 shared paper)David Newton‐De Molina (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- The Southern Journal of Philosophy (3 papers)Philosophical Studies (3 papers)Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (3 papers)Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (1 paper)The British Journal of Aesthetics (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United States
In The Last Decade
William E. Tolhurst
12 papers receiving 123 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 38
- Philosophy 150
- Literature and Literary Theory 40
- Visual Arts and Performing Arts 15
- Architecture 3
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 10
Countries citing papers authored by William E. Tolhurst
This map shows the geographic impact of William E. Tolhurst'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 William E. Tolhurst with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites William E. Tolhurst more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by William E. Tolhurst
This network shows the impact of papers produced by William E. Tolhurst. 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 William E. Tolhurst. The network helps show where William E. Tolhurst may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 3 scholars most cited alongside William E. Tolhurst, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1979 | 53 | |
| 2 | 1999 | 45 | |
| 3 | 1979 | 18 | |
| 4 | 1984 | 16 | |
| 5 | 1987 | 15 | |
| 6 | 1978 | 14 | |
| 7 | 1991 | 14 | |
| 8 | 1986 | 7 | |
| 9 | Moral Experience and the Internalist Argument against Moral Realism | 1995 | 6 |
| 10 | 1983 | 5 | |
| 11 | 1983 | 3 | |
| 12 | 1976 | 1 | |
| 13 | 1979 | 0 |
About William E. Tolhurst
William E. Tolhurst is a scholar working on Philosophy, Literature and Literary Theory, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Visual Arts and Performing Arts and Clinical Psychology, having authored 13 papers that have together received 197 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Philosophical Ethics and Theory (8 papers), Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (4 papers), Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics (4 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (3 papers), Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art (3 papers), Suicide and Self-Harm Studies (1 paper), Art, Aesthetics, and Perception (1 paper) and Narrative Theory and Analysis (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Philosophy (150 citations), Literature and Literary Theory (40 citations), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (15 citations), Architecture (3 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (10 citations). William E. Tolhurst has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Noah M. Lemos, Samuel C. Wheeler and David Newton‐De Molina. Their work appears in journals such as The Southern Journal of Philosophy, Philosophical Studies, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research and The British Journal of Aesthetics.
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.