Marc Redfield
Impact in
-
- Contemporary Literature and Criticism
- Narrative Theory and Analysis
- Themes in Literature Analysis
- Visual Arts and Performing Arts top 10%
- Comics and Graphic Narratives
Papers in
-
- Contemporary Literature and Criticism 4
- Literature and Cultural Memory 4
- Narrative Theory and Analysis 1
-
- Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism 3
- Rhetoric and Communication Studies 2
- Co-authors
- David L. Clark (1 shared paper)Christopher Norris (1 shared paper)Alexander Gelley (1 shared paper)J. Hillis Miller (1 shared paper)Peter Fenves (1 shared paper)Kevin McLaughlin (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- diacritics (6 papers)Studies in Romanticism (3 papers)The German Quarterly (2 papers)The Wordsworth Circle (2 papers)European Romantic Review (2 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesSwitzerland
In The Last Decade
Marc Redfield
23 papers receiving 125 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 52
- Literature and Literary Theory 67
- Visual Arts and Performing Arts 20
- Philosophy 27
- Cultural Studies 18
- History 17
Countries citing papers authored by Marc Redfield
This map shows the geographic impact of Marc Redfield'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 Marc Redfield with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Marc Redfield more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Marc Redfield
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Marc Redfield. 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 Marc Redfield. The network helps show where Marc Redfield may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 6 scholars most cited alongside Marc Redfield, 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 31 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | High Anxieties: Cultural Studies in Addiction | 2002 | 63 |
| 2 | 2005 | 21 | |
| 3 | 2007 | 19 | |
| 4 | 1999 | 15 | |
| 5 | 2009 | 14 | |
| 6 | 2018 | 8 | |
| 7 | 2009 | 8 | |
| 8 | 2006 | 7 | |
| 9 | 1989 | 7 | |
| 10 | 1990 | 5 | |
| 11 | 1989 | 3 | |
| 12 | 2001 | 3 | |
| 13 | 2015 | 2 | |
| 14 | 2000 | 2 | |
| 15 | 2007 | 2 | |
| 16 | 2013 | 2 | |
| 17 | 2008 | 2 | |
| 18 | 1999 | 2 | |
| 19 | 1997 | 2 | |
| 20 | 1996 | 2 |
About Marc Redfield
Marc Redfield is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, Political Science and International Relations and Social Psychology, having authored 31 papers that have together received 195 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Contemporary Literature and Criticism (4 papers), Literature and Cultural Memory (4 papers), Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism (3 papers), Intelligence, Security, War Strategy (2 papers), Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration (2 papers), Rhetoric and Communication Studies (2 papers), Laser-induced spectroscopy and plasma (1 paper) and Narrative Theory and Analysis (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Literature and Literary Theory (67 citations), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (20 citations), Philosophy (27 citations), Cultural Studies (18 citations) and History (17 citations). Marc Redfield has collaborated with scholars based in United States and Switzerland. Frequent co-authors include David L. Clark, Christopher Norris, Alexander Gelley, J. Hillis Miller, Peter Fenves and Kevin McLaughlin. Their work appears in journals such as diacritics, Studies in Romanticism, The German Quarterly, The Wordsworth Circle and European Romantic Review.
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.