Review of Middle East Studies

183 papers and 331 indexed citations i.

About

The 183 papers published in Review of Middle East Studies in the last decades have received a total of 331 indexed citations. Papers published in Review of Middle East Studies usually cover Sociology and Political Science (100 papers), Political Science and International Relations (89 papers) and Anthropology (18 papers) specifically the topics of Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies (48 papers), Politics of Islamic Reform in Middle East (44 papers) and Middle East Politics and Society (29 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Review of Middle East Studies are Elliott Colla, James B. Hoesterey, Jessica Winegar, Şebnem Gümüşçü, Berk Esen, Allison Spencer Hartnett, Saleem H. Ali, Linda T. Darling, Michael E. Bonine and Dietrich Jung.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Review of Middle East Studies

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Review of Middle East 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 Review of Middle East Studies.

Countries where authors publish in Review of Middle East Studies

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Review of Middle East 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 Review of Middle East Studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Review of Middle East Studies 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