Countries where authors publish in Utopian Studies
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Utopian Studies. 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 Utopian Studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Utopian Studies more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Utopian Studies. 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 Utopian Studies.
About Utopian Studies
The 792 papers published in Utopian Studies in the last decades have received a total of 4.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Utopian Studies usually cover Philosophy (229 papers), Literature and Literary Theory (95 papers), History (87 papers), Museology (24 papers) and Cultural Studies (53 papers) specifically the topics of Utopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction (170 papers), Political Economy and Marxism (94 papers), Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism (30 papers), Gothic Literature and Media Analysis (29 papers), Race, History, and American Society (22 papers), Anarchism and Radical Politics (21 papers), Critical Theory and Philosophy (21 papers) and Walter Benjamin Studies Compilation (20 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Utopian Studies are Raphael Sassower, Lyman Tower Sargent, John R. Pfeiffer, Martin van Creveld, Darren Jorgensen, Lucy Sargisson, Ruth Levitas, Patrick Parrinder, Roger Paden and William J. Mitchell.
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.