The Eighteenth century/The eighteenth century (Lubbock, Tex. Online) · 1×
×1.2391/337LLT
×0.7233/312HISTO
×0.952/56MUSEO
×0.6126/221ANTHR
×1.247/39GPD
Citations per year
'16
'17
'18
'19
'20
'21
'22
'23
'24
'25
'26
Countries where authors publish in Romanticism
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Romanticism. 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 Romanticism with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Romanticism more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Romanticism. 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 Romanticism.
About Romanticism
The 444 papers published in Romanticism in the last decades have received a total of 811 indexed citations . Papers published in Romanticism usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (146 papers), History (76 papers), Anthropology (54 papers), Museology (17 papers) and History and Philosophy of Science (19 papers) specifically the topics of Literature: history, themes, analysis (44 papers), Travel Writing and Literature (40 papers), Historical and Literary Studies (25 papers), Philippine History and Culture (21 papers), Folklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies (20 papers), Scottish History and National Identity (18 papers), Science Education and Perceptions (17 papers) and Historical Art and Culture Studies (17 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Romanticism are Nigel Leask, David Fairer, Gregory Dart, Timothy Morton, Simon Bainbridge, Richard Cronin, Anthony John Harding, Ralph O’Connor, Nick Groom and Marcus Tomalin.
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.