Clive D. Field
Impact in
- Gender Studies top 10%
- Sports, Gender, and Society
- Health top 10%
- Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Papers in
-
- Religion and Society Interactions 26
- Religion, Society, and Development 13
-
- American Constitutional Law and Politics 12
- Co-authors
- Ben Clements (2 shared papers)Siobhan McAndrew (1 shared paper)David Voas (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- Journal of Contemporary Religion (3 papers)Contemporary British History (2 papers)The Journal of Ecclesiastical History (2 papers)LIBER Quarterly The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries (2 papers)Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomRussia
In The Last Decade
Clive D. Field
40 papers receiving 287 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 46
- Gender Studies 67
- Health 49
- Sociology and Political Science 252
- History 50
- Library and Information Sciences 7
Countries citing papers authored by Clive D. Field
This map shows the geographic impact of Clive D. Field's research. 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 Clive D. Field with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Clive D. Field more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Clive D. Field
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Clive D. Field. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Clive D. Field. The network helps show where Clive D. Field may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 3 scholars most cited alongside Clive D. Field, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 48 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2014 | 76 | |
| 2 | 2007 | 67 | |
| 3 | 2014 | 23 | |
| 4 | 2011 | 20 | |
| 5 | 2001 | 17 | |
| 6 | 2014 | 17 | |
| 7 | 1993 | 11 | |
| 8 | 2014 | 9 | |
| 9 | 2017 | 7 | |
| 10 | 2013 | 6 | |
| 11 | 2008 | 6 | |
| 12 | 2004 | 6 | |
| 13 | 1977 | 6 | |
| 14 | 1991 | 6 | |
| 15 | 2014 | 5 | |
| 16 | 2001 | 5 | |
| 17 | Secularization in the Long 1960s: Numerating Religion in Britain | 2017 | 5 |
| 18 | 2008 | 5 | |
| 19 | 1992 | 5 | |
| 20 | 2019 | 4 |
About Clive D. Field
Clive D. Field is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Political Science and International Relations, History, Geography, Planning and Development and Religious studies, having authored 48 papers that have together received 353 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Religion and Society Interactions (26 papers), Religion, Society, and Development (13 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (12 papers), Religious Tourism and Spaces (11 papers), Reformation and Early Modern Christianity (7 papers), Religious Freedom and Discrimination (3 papers), Religion, Gender, and Enlightenment (3 papers) and Medieval Literature and History (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Gender Studies (67 citations), Health (49 citations), Sociology and Political Science (252 citations), History (50 citations) and Library and Information Sciences (7 citations). Clive D. Field has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom and Russia. Frequent co-authors include Ben Clements, Siobhan McAndrew and David Voas. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Contemporary Religion, Contemporary British History, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, LIBER Quarterly The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries and Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations.
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.