Countries where authors publish in Lithic Technology
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Lithic Technology. 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 Lithic Technology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Lithic Technology more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Lithic Technology. 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 Lithic Technology.
About Lithic Technology
The 626 papers published in Lithic Technology in the last decades have received a total of 7.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Lithic Technology usually cover Archeology (84 papers), Paleontology (362 papers), Anthropology (387 papers), Archeology (192 papers) and Geography, Planning and Development (23 papers) specifically the topics of Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology (364 papers), Archaeology and ancient environmental studies (344 papers), Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies (99 papers), Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction (82 papers), Archaeology and Rock Art Studies (63 papers), Archaeological and Geological Studies (40 papers), Evolution and Paleontology Studies (31 papers) and Pacific and Southeast Asian Studies (22 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Lithic Technology are Michael Shott, Brian D. Hayden, C. Britt Bousman, Frédéric Sellet, Harold L. Dibble, Metin I. Eren, Grant S. Mccall, Daniel S. Amick, John E. Hughes Clark and Leland W. Patterson.
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.