Philosophy of Music Education Review

311 papers and 1.3k indexed citations i.

About

The 311 papers published in Philosophy of Music Education Review in the last decades have received a total of 1.3k indexed citations. Papers published in Philosophy of Music Education Review usually cover Music (246 papers), Education (88 papers) and Cognitive Neuroscience (53 papers) specifically the topics of Diverse Music Education Insights (233 papers), Musicology and Musical Analysis (54 papers) and Neuroscience and Music Perception (50 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Philosophy of Music Education Review are Julia Eklund Koza, Thomas A. Regelski, Randall Everett Allsup, June Boyce‐Tillman, Cathy Benedict, Estelle R. Jorgensen, Heidi Westerlund, Elizabeth Gould, Andrew Palmer and Juliet Hess.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Philosophy of Music Education Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Philosophy of Music Education Review. 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 Philosophy of Music Education Review.

Countries where authors publish in Philosophy of Music Education Review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Philosophy of Music Education Review. 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 Philosophy of Music Education Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Philosophy of Music Education Review more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025