Countries where authors publish in Religious Education
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Religious Education. 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 Religious Education with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Religious Education more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Religious Education. 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 Religious Education.
About Religious Education
The 1.9k papers published in Religious Education in the last decades have received a total of 6.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Religious Education usually cover Religious studies (235 papers), Health (295 papers), Education (1.1k papers), Sociology and Political Science (841 papers) and Demography (190 papers) specifically the topics of Religious Education and Schools (909 papers), Religion, Society, and Development (398 papers), Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology (289 papers), Religion and Society Interactions (211 papers), Education and Islamic Studies (185 papers), Jewish Identity and Society (174 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (150 papers) and Theological Perspectives and Practices (125 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Religious Education are Charles Y. Glock, S. Miedema, Leslie J. Francis, James W. Fowler, Brendan Hyde, Liam Gearon, Malcolm S. Knowles, John M. Hull, Richard Rymarz and Doret de Ruyter.
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.