Lívio Sansone
- Sociology and Political Science top 5%
- Anthropology top 5%
- Political Science and International Relations top 10%
- Cultural Studies top 5%
- Urban Studies top 5%
- Topics
- Race, Identity, and Education in Brazil (11 papers)Migration, Racism, and Human Rights (7 papers)Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy (4 papers)
- Journals
- SHILAP Revista de lepidopterologíaContemporary Sociology A Journal of ReviewsCritique of Anthropology
- Partner nations
- BrazilUnited KingdomUnited States
In The Last Decade
Lívio Sansone
36 papers receiving 325 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 75
- Sociology and Political Science 262
- Anthropology 85
- Political Science and International Relations 80
- Cultural Studies 57
- Urban Studies 41
Countries citing papers authored by Lívio Sansone
This map shows the geographic impact of Lívio Sansone'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 Lívio Sansone with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Lívio Sansone more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Lívio Sansone
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Lívio Sansone. 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 Lívio Sansone. The network helps show where Lívio Sansone may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Lívio Sansone
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Lívio Sansone. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Lívio Sansone based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Lívio Sansone. Lívio Sansone is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | El multiculturalismo a la brasileña y la reacción conservadora | 1 |
| 3 | 1 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 5 | 4 | |
| 6 | 12 | |
| 7 | Centro de Estudos Afro-Orientais (CEAO) | 1 |
| 8 | 1 | |
| 9 | 1 | |
| 10 | 25 | |
| 11 | Apresentação: que multiculturalismo se quer para o Brasil? | 1 |
| 12 | Projeto UNESCO no Brasil: textos críticos | 6 |
| 13 | 2 | |
| 14 | O Estado e o multiculturalismo | 1 |
| 15 | 7 | |
| 16 | 3 | |
| 17 | 12 | |
| 18 | 5 | |
| 19 | 20 | |
| 20 | 12 |
About Lívio Sansone
Lívio Sansone is a scholar working on Anthropology, Health and Space and Planetary Science, having authored 41 papers that have together received 414 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Race, Identity, and Education in Brazil (11 papers), Migration, Racism, and Human Rights (7 papers) and Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Anthropology (85 citations), Cultural Studies (57 citations) and Urban Studies (41 citations). Lívio Sansone has collaborated with scholars based in Brazil, United Kingdom and United States. Frequent co-authors include Teresa Caldeira, Boubacar Barry, Simone Monteiro, Cláudio Alves Furtado, G. Zerbi and Suzanne Model. Their work appears in journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews and Critique of Anthropology.
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.