John Kieschnick
Impact in
- Religious studies top 2%
- Indian and Buddhist Studies
- Cultural Studies top 5%
- Japanese History and Culture
Papers in
-
- Chinese history and philosophy 12
-
- Japanese History and Culture 7
- Journals
- History of Religions (1 paper)Journal of the American Oriental Society (4 papers)Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (1 paper)Princeton University Press eBooks (2 papers)PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United Kingdom
In The Last Decade
John Kieschnick
12 papers receiving 139 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 45
- Religious studies 62
- Cultural Studies 55
- Anthropology 64
- Sociology and Political Science 160
- Geography, Planning and Development 12
Countries citing papers authored by John Kieschnick
This map shows the geographic impact of John Kieschnick'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 John Kieschnick with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John Kieschnick more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by John Kieschnick
This network shows the impact of papers produced by John Kieschnick. 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 John Kieschnick. The network helps show where John Kieschnick may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 2 scholars most cited alongside John Kieschnick, 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 | 2003 | 103 | |
| 2 | 2001 | 46 | |
| 3 | 1997 | 24 | |
| 4 | 2014 | 14 | |
| 5 | 2002 | 7 | |
| 6 | 1992 | 5 | |
| 7 | 2022 | 3 | |
| 8 | 2001 | 2 | |
| 9 | 2020 | 1 | |
| 10 | 2009 | 1 | |
| 11 | 1994 | 1 | |
| 12 | A history of the bathhouse in Chinese buddhist monasteries | 2012 | 1 |
| 13 | 2009 | 1 | |
| 14 | 2000 | 0 | |
| 15 | 2004 | 0 | |
| 16 | India in the Chinese Imagination | 2013 | 0 |
About John Kieschnick
John Kieschnick is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Cultural Studies, Religious studies, Anthropology and Political Science and International Relations, having authored 16 papers that have together received 209 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Chinese history and philosophy (12 papers), Indian and Buddhist Studies (7 papers), Japanese History and Culture (7 papers), Eurasian Exchange Networks (2 papers), Medical Research and Treatments (1 paper), Indian History and Philosophy (1 paper), Politics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East (1 paper) and Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Religious studies (62 citations), Cultural Studies (55 citations), Anthropology (64 citations), Sociology and Political Science (160 citations) and Geography, Planning and Development (12 citations). John Kieschnick has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Robert Ford Campany and Chün‐fang Yü. Their work appears in journals such as History of Religions, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Princeton University Press eBooks and PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University).
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.