Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory

220 papers receiving 1k citations

Peers

Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory
Comparison fields: 5 of 107
  • Human-Computer Interaction 78
  • Health Informatics 19
  • Communication 67
  • Information Systems 137
  • Safety Research 65
Replace University of Applied Arts Vienna with:
University of Applied Arts Vienna Austria
Tehničko Veleučilište u Zagrebu Croatia
FHWien der WKW Austria
Ukrainian Catholic University Ukraine
Centre of Social and Psychological Sciences of the Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovakia
AAB College Kosovo
National-Louis University Poland
St. Cyril and St. Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo Bulgaria
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy Czechia
Institute for Social Research Croatia
Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory relative to University of Applied Arts Vienna Austria University of Applied Arts Vienna's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×4×6×8×9.5×
University of Applied Arts Vienna · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory. 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 papers produced at Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory at the time of their publication.

About Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory have published 341 papers, which have received a total of 1k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 73 papers in Philosophy, 31 papers in Cultural Studies, 129 papers in Sociology and Political Science, 64 papers in Political Science and International Relations and 13 papers in Communication on the topics of Balkans: History, Politics, Society (28 papers), Political Theory and Democracy (18 papers), Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (16 papers), Philosophical Ethics and Theory (14 papers), Political Philosophy and Ethics (14 papers), Ethics and Social Impacts of AI (12 papers), Foucault, Power, and Ethics (10 papers) and Eastern European Communism and Reforms (10 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Human-Computer Interaction (78 citations), Health Informatics (19 citations), Communication (67 citations), Information Systems (137 citations) and Safety Research (65 citations). Authors at Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory collaborate with scholars in Serbia, Spain and Germany and have published in prestigious journals including Scientific Reports, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, European Journal of Futures Research, Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea Studies and Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. Some of Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory's most productive authors include Ljubiša Bojić, Vojin Rakić, Agariadne Dwinggo Samala, Fadhli Ranuharja, Marija Branković, Xiaoming Zhaı, Kumiko Aoki, Yeka Hendriyani, Ronal Watrianthos and Bojana M. Dinić.

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 institutions with similar magnitude of impact