Countries where authors publish in Anthropology of Work Review
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Anthropology of Work Review. 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 Anthropology of Work Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Anthropology of Work Review more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Anthropology of Work Review
This network shows the impact of papers published in Anthropology of Work Review. 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 Anthropology of Work Review.
About Anthropology of Work Review
The 441 papers published in Anthropology of Work Review in the last decades have received a total of 9.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Anthropology of Work Review usually cover Public Administration (48 papers), Anthropology (59 papers), Museology (17 papers), Sociology and Political Science (191 papers) and Urban Studies (25 papers) specifically the topics of Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy (54 papers), Labor Movements and Unions (48 papers), Global trade, sustainability, and social impact (44 papers), Employment and Welfare Studies (42 papers), Migration and Labor Dynamics (32 papers), Anthropological Studies and Insights (30 papers), Management and Organizational Studies (28 papers) and Digital Economy and Work Transformation (23 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Anthropology of Work Review are Frederick C. Gamst, David Hakken, Jim Weil, Sue Lurie, Tomoko Hamada, James H. Frey, Frances Rothstein, Marietta L. Baba, Sarah Besky and Kathleen M. Millar.
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.