Reference & User Services Quarterly

7.4k citations
840 papers · · active since 2016

Impact in

Papers in

    • Library Science and Information Literacy 332
    • Library Science and Administration 241
    • Web and Library Services 288
    • Library Collection Development and Digital Resources 156
    • Information Retrieval and Search Behavior 18

Reference & User Services Quarterly

633 papers receiving 5.8k citations

Peers

Reference & User Services Quarterly
Comparison fields: 5 of 165
  • Library and Information Sciences 3.8k
  • Information Systems 3.9k
  • Communication 886
  • Computer Science Applications 444
  • Human Factors and Ergonomics 152
Replace Information Technology and Libraries with:
Information Technology and Libraries United States
College & Undergraduate Libraries United States
Australian Academic & Research Libraries Australia
Education for Information United Kingdom
portal Libraries and the Academy United States
Library Hi Tech News United States
The Bottom Line Managing Library Finances United States
Internet Reference Services Quarterly United States
New Review of Academic Librarianship United Kingdom
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice United States
Reference & User Services Quarterly relative to Information Technology and Libraries United States Information Technology and Libraries's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.0×
Information Technology and Libraries · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Reference & User Services Quarterly

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Reference & User Services Quarterly. 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 Reference & User Services Quarterly with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Reference & User Services Quarterly more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Reference & User Services Quarterly

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Reference & User Services Quarterly. 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 Reference & User Services Quarterly.

About Reference & User Services Quarterly

The 840 papers published in Reference & User Services Quarterly in the last decades have received a total of 7.4k indexed citations . Papers published in Reference & User Services Quarterly usually cover Library and Information Sciences (417 papers), Information Systems (390 papers), Communication (37 papers), Human Factors and Ergonomics (10 papers) and Conservation (13 papers) specifically the topics of Library Science and Information Literacy (332 papers), Web and Library Services (288 papers), Library Science and Administration (241 papers), Library Collection Development and Digital Resources (156 papers), Online and Blended Learning (24 papers), Digital Games and Media (21 papers), Wikis in Education and Collaboration (19 papers) and Information Retrieval and Search Behavior (18 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Reference & User Services Quarterly are Melissa R. Gross, Beth S. Woodard, Li Wang, Lori Arp, James K. Elmborg, Rachel Applegate, Catherine Sheldrick Ross, R. David Lankes, Karen Antell and JJ Pionke.

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