Texas Studies in Literature & Language

572 citations
343 papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

    • Contemporary Literature and Criticism
    • Literature: history, themes, analysis
    • Poetry Analysis and Criticism
    • American and British Literature Analysis
    • Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
  • Classics top 10%
    • Medieval Literature and History

Papers in

    • Poetry Analysis and Criticism 44
    • Literature: history, themes, analysis 35
    • American and British Literature Analysis 32
    • Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism 31
    • Contemporary Literature and Criticism 28
    • Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies 18
    • Medieval Literature and History 27

Texas Studies in Literature & Language

166 papers receiving 298 citations

Peers

Texas Studies in Literature & Language
Comparison fields: 5 of 64
  • Literature and Literary Theory 314
  • Classics 75
  • History 119
  • Cultural Studies 74
  • Visual Arts and Performing Arts 42
Replace Philological quarterly with:
Philological quarterly United States
The Cambridge Quarterly United Kingdom
˜The œEighteenth century/˜The œeighteenth century (Lubbock, Tex. Online) United States
postmedieval a journal of medieval cultural studies United States
Pacific Coast Philology United States
Fabula United States
Romance Quarterly United States
Hispanic Research Journal United Kingdom
European Journal of English Studies United Kingdom
Book history Canada
Texas Studies in Literature & Language relative to Philological quarterly United States Philological quarterly's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.5×
Philological quarterly · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Texas Studies in Literature & Language

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published in Texas Studies in Literature & Language

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Texas Studies in Literature & Language. 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 Texas Studies in Literature & Language.

About Texas Studies in Literature & Language

The 343 papers published in Texas Studies in Literature & Language in the last decades have received a total of 572 indexed citations . Papers published in Texas Studies in Literature & Language usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (211 papers), Classics (32 papers), History (74 papers), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (23 papers) and Music (13 papers) specifically the topics of Poetry Analysis and Criticism (44 papers), Literature: history, themes, analysis (35 papers), American and British Literature Analysis (32 papers), Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (31 papers), Contemporary Literature and Criticism (28 papers), Medieval Literature and History (27 papers), Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies (18 papers) and Gothic Literature and Media Analysis (16 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Texas Studies in Literature & Language are Dan McIntyre, Mark Richardson, Peter J. Rabinowitz, Luc Herman, Sarah Stanbury, Brian N. Williams, Zhang Longxi, Vincent Pérez, Nïkhil Gupta and Matthew Elder.

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