Countries where authors publish in Television & New Media
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Television & New Media. 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 Television & New Media with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Television & New Media more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Television & New Media
This network shows the impact of papers published in Television & New Media. 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 Television & New Media.
About Television & New Media
The 959 papers published in Television & New Media in the last decades have received a total of 14.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Television & New Media usually cover Communication (319 papers), Gender Studies (303 papers), Urban Studies (84 papers), Cultural Studies (115 papers) and Music (42 papers) specifically the topics of Media Studies and Communication (246 papers), Gender, Feminism, and Media (244 papers), Cinema and Media Studies (159 papers), Digital Games and Media (151 papers), Social Media and Politics (121 papers), Asian Culture and Media Studies (86 papers), Cultural Industries and Urban Development (79 papers) and Media, Gender, and Advertising (74 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Television & New Media are Nick Couldry, Ulises A. Mejias, Mark Andrejevic, Paola Ricaurte Quijano, José van Dijck, Sarah Florini, Christian Fuchs, John Corner, Silvio Waisbord and Rebecca Lewis.
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.