Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies · 1×
×1.1456/410LLT
×1.3215/163CS
×0.788/118VAPA
×1.4156/114HISTO
×2.8143/52ANTHR
Citations per year
'16
'17
'18
'19
'20
'21
'22
'23
'24
'25
'26
Countries where authors publish in Genre
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Genre. 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 Genre with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Genre more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Genre. 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 Genre.
About Genre
The 311 papers published in Genre in the last decades have received a total of 1.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Genre usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (141 papers), Music (20 papers), Cultural Studies (47 papers), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (19 papers) and Philosophy (43 papers) specifically the topics of Contemporary Literature and Criticism (35 papers), Crime and Detective Fiction Studies (27 papers), Poetry Analysis and Criticism (25 papers), Gothic Literature and Media Analysis (20 papers), Narrative Theory and Analysis (18 papers), Music History and Culture (15 papers), Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (14 papers) and Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies (12 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Genre are Steven George Salaita, Ron Day, Luke Carson, Timothy S. Murphy, Benjamin Noys, Robert P. Markley, Julie Rak, Brian McHale, Catherine Ceniza Choy and Leif B. Sorensen.
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.