Countries where authors publish in Library Management
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Library 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 Library Management with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Library Management more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Library 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 Library Management.
About Library Management
The 1.5k papers published in Library Management in the last decades have received a total of 15.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Library Management usually cover Library and Information Sciences (686 papers), Information Systems (551 papers), Conservation (70 papers), Communication (148 papers) and Information Systems and Management (132 papers) specifically the topics of Library Science and Information Literacy (562 papers), Library Science and Administration (369 papers), Web and Library Services (248 papers), Library Collection Development and Digital Resources (184 papers), Knowledge Management and Sharing (116 papers), Technology Adoption and User Behaviour (68 papers), Digital and Traditional Archives Management (66 papers) and Research Data Management Practices (65 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Library Management are Jennifer Rowley, Stuart Hannabuss, Ian Smith, Kanwal Ameen, Sheila Corrall, Linda Ashcroft, Chiao‐Chen Chang, Paul Genoni, Konstantina Martzoukou and Roxanne Missingham.
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.