Contemporary Buddhism

308 papers and 3.4k indexed citations i.

About

The 308 papers published in Contemporary Buddhism in the last decades have received a total of 3.4k indexed citations. Papers published in Contemporary Buddhism usually cover Sociology and Political Science (140 papers), Religious studies (115 papers) and Political Science and International Relations (86 papers) specifically the topics of Indian and Buddhist Studies (115 papers), Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography (63 papers) and Chinese history and philosophy (60 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Contemporary Buddhism are Jon Kabat‐Zinn, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Georges Dreyfus, Paul Grossman, Rupert Gethin, Nicholas T. Van Dam, Ruth A. Baer, J. Mark G. Williams, Willem Kuyken and Mirabai Bush.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Contemporary Buddhism

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Contemporary Buddhism. 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 Contemporary Buddhism.

Countries where authors publish in Contemporary Buddhism

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Contemporary Buddhism. 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 Contemporary Buddhism with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Contemporary Buddhism more than expected).

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025