Countries where authors publish in Victorian Studies
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Victorian 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 Victorian Studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Victorian Studies more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Victorian 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 Victorian Studies.
About Victorian Studies
The 934 papers published in Victorian Studies in the last decades have received a total of 3.4k indexed citations . Papers published in Victorian Studies usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (276 papers), History (132 papers), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (57 papers), History and Philosophy of Science (56 papers) and Museology (38 papers) specifically the topics of Literature: history, themes, analysis (69 papers), Australian History and Society (59 papers), Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies (42 papers), Contemporary Literature and Criticism (42 papers), Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (38 papers), Travel Writing and Literature (35 papers), Modernist Literature and Criticism (34 papers) and Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes (34 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Victorian Studies are Mary Poovey, Caroline Levine, Athena Vrettos, Elaine Hadley, Philippa Levine, Sharon Marcus, Jill L. Matus, Amanda Anderson, John M. Picker and Nicholas Daly.
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.