Countries where authors publish in Modern fiction studies
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Modern fiction studies. 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 Modern fiction studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Modern fiction studies more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Modern fiction studies
This network shows the impact of papers published in Modern fiction studies. 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 Modern fiction studies.
About Modern fiction studies
The 1.3k papers published in Modern fiction studies in the last decades have received a total of 7.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Modern fiction studies usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (777 papers), Cultural Studies (204 papers), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (103 papers), History (185 papers) and Philosophy (170 papers) specifically the topics of Contemporary Literature and Criticism (192 papers), Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies (130 papers), American and British Literature Analysis (128 papers), Poetry Analysis and Criticism (89 papers), Themes in Literature Analysis (82 papers), Modernist Literature and Criticism (79 papers), Gothic Literature and Media Analysis (66 papers) and Latin American and Latino Studies (60 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Modern fiction studies are Barbara Page, Gillian Whitlock, John Beverley, Valerie Rohy, Graham Huggan, Hillary Chute, Mark Poster, Marianne DeKoven, Thomas B. Byers and Rob Nixon.
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.