Countries where authors publish in Security Dialogue
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Security Dialogue. 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 Security Dialogue with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Security Dialogue more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Security Dialogue. 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 Security Dialogue.
About Security Dialogue
The 1.1k papers published in Security Dialogue in the last decades have received a total of 27.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Security Dialogue usually cover Political Science and International Relations (652 papers), Sociology and Political Science (631 papers), Gender Studies (64 papers), Transportation (21 papers) and General Energy (5 papers) specifically the topics of International Relations and Foreign Policy (259 papers), Global Security and Public Health (220 papers), Peacebuilding and International Security (144 papers), Global Peace and Security Dynamics (105 papers), Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence (74 papers), European Politics and Security (67 papers), Gender, Security, and Conflict (62 papers) and Nuclear Issues and Defense (51 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Security Dialogue are Roger Mac Ginty, Paul Roe, Claudia Aradau, Mark Duffield, David Chandler, Melinda Cooper, Jeremy J. Walker, Jef Huysmans, Didier Bigo and Louise Amoore.
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.