Countries where authors publish in Event Management
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Event Management. 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 Event Management with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Event Management more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Event Management. 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 Event Management.
About Event Management
The 997 papers published in Event Management in the last decades have received a total of 14.9k indexed citations . Papers published in Event Management usually cover Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management (77 papers), Gender Studies (337 papers), Sociology and Political Science (842 papers), Social Psychology (224 papers) and Marketing (95 papers) specifically the topics of Sport and Mega-Event Impacts (723 papers), Sports, Gender, and Society (312 papers), Diverse Aspects of Tourism Research (261 papers), Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management (193 papers), Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering (110 papers), Conferences and Exhibitions Management (105 papers), Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification (69 papers) and Digital Marketing and Social Media (67 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Event Management are Donald Getz, Ros Derrett, Gianna Moscardo, Leo Jago, Trevor Mules, Michael Morgan, Judith Mair, Bill Faulkner, Tommy D. Andersson and Elizabeth Fredline.
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.