Countries where authors publish in American Quarterly
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in American Quarterly. 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 published in American Quarterly with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites American Quarterly more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in American Quarterly. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in American Quarterly.
About American Quarterly
The 3.3k papers published in American Quarterly in the last decades have received a total of 44.9k indexed citations . Papers published in American Quarterly usually cover Music (170 papers), Cultural Studies (403 papers), Literature and Literary Theory (429 papers), History (338 papers) and Visual Arts and Performing Arts (127 papers) specifically the topics of Race, History, and American Society (420 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (301 papers), Latin American and Latino Studies (194 papers), Asian American and Pacific Histories (185 papers), American History and Culture (183 papers), American and British Literature Analysis (152 papers), Music History and Culture (113 papers) and American Environmental and Regional History (94 papers). The most active scholars publishing in American Quarterly are Stuart Levine, Marshall McLuhan, Robert Alan Dahl, John Ericson, Barbara Welter, Patrick D. Hazard, Joseph T. Klapper, George Lipsitz, Vine Jr. Deloria and Kenneth M. Roemer.
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.