Literature and Literary Theory

437.9k papers and 3.6M indexed citations i.

About

437.9k papers covering Literature and Literary Theory have received a total of 3.6M indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Second Language Learning and Teaching, Discourse Analysis in Language Studies and EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning and also cover the fields of Language and Linguistics, Sociology and Political Science and Philosophy. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Sociology and Political Science, Language and Linguistics and Education. Some of the most active scholars covering Literature and Literary Theory are Ken Hyland, Emanuel A. Schegloff, Rod Ellis, Judith Butler, Zoltán Dörnyei, Richard E. Petty, Harvey Sacks, Teun A. van Dijk, Gail Jefferson and Suresh Canagarajah.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about Literature and Literary Theory

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering Literature and Literary Theory. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers covering Literature and Literary Theory.

Countries where authors publish papers about Literature and Literary Theory

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research in Literature and Literary Theory. 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 about Literature and Literary Theory with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Literature and Literary Theory 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 fields with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025