Studies in the age of Chaucer

453 papers and 1.3k indexed citations i.

About

The 453 papers published in Studies in the age of Chaucer in the last decades have received a total of 1.3k indexed citations. Papers published in Studies in the age of Chaucer usually cover Classics (372 papers), History (158 papers) and Language and Linguistics (125 papers) specifically the topics of Medieval Literature and History (368 papers), Historical Studies of British Isles (120 papers) and Linguistics and language evolution (101 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Studies in the age of Chaucer are Paul Strohm, Anne Middleton, Larry D. Benson, Nicholas Watson, William J. Rothwell, Linne R. Mooney, Susan Crane, J. Adin Mann, Alan J. Fletcher and Carolyn Dinshaw.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Studies in the age of Chaucer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Studies in the age of Chaucer. 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 Studies in the age of Chaucer.

Countries where authors publish in Studies in the age of Chaucer

Since Specialization
Citations

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