James Procter
-
- Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies 7
- Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism 1
- Cultural Studies top 10%
- Caribbean history, culture, and politics 1
- History top 10%
-
- Chinese history and philosophy 1
- South African History and Culture 1
-
- South Asian Cinema and Culture 2
-
- Urban and Rural Development Challenges 1
-
- African history and culture studies 1
- Journals
- Small Axe A Caribbean Journal of Criticism (1 paper)Interventions (1 paper)World Literature Today (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United Kingdom
In The Last Decade
James Procter
12 papers receiving 105 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 36
- Literature and Literary Theory 63
- Cultural Studies 22
- Music 7
- History 19
- Sociology and Political Science 70
Countries citing papers authored by James Procter
This map shows the geographic impact of James Procter'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 James Procter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites James Procter more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by James Procter
This network shows the impact of papers produced by James Procter. 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 James Procter. The network helps show where James Procter may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network
The 5 scholars most cited alongside James Procter, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2024 | 0 | |
| 2 | 2015 | 5 | |
| 3 | 2014 | 9 | |
| 4 | Reading Across Worlds: Transnational Book Groups and the Reception of Difference | 2014 | 5 |
| 5 | Out of Bounds: British Black & Asian Poets | 2013 | 1 |
| 6 | 2011 | 4 | |
| 7 | 2011 | 3 | |
| 8 | Reading as 'Social Glue': Book Groups, Multiculture, and Small Island Read 2007 | 2009 | 1 |
| 9 | 2009 | 8 | |
| 10 | 2007 | 3 | |
| 11 | 2004 | 47 | |
| 12 | Dwelling Places: Postwar Black British Writing | 2003 | 41 |
| 13 | 2002 | 9 |
About James Procter
James Procter is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Visual Arts and Performing Arts, Anthropology, Urban Studies and Cultural Studies, having authored 13 papers that have together received 136 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Postcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies (7 papers), South Asian Cinema and Culture (2 papers), Urban and Rural Development Challenges (1 paper), Chinese history and philosophy (1 paper), Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (1 paper), African history and culture studies (1 paper), South African History and Culture (1 paper) and Caribbean history, culture, and politics (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Literature and Literary Theory (63 citations), Cultural Studies (22 citations), Music (7 citations), History (19 citations) and Sociology and Political Science (70 citations). James Procter has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Bethan Benwell, Angela Smith, Gemma Robinson, Danielle Fuller and Jackie Kay. Their work appears in journals such as Small Axe A Caribbean Journal of Criticism, Interventions, World Literature Today, New Formations and Medical Entomology and Zoology.
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.