Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Consuming dark tourism: A Thanatological Perspective
2008494 citationsPhilip R. Stone, Richard SharpleyAnnals of Tourism Researchprofile →
Citations per year, relative to Philip R. Stone Philip R. Stone (= 1×)
peers
Malcolm Foley
Countries citing papers authored by Philip R. Stone
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Philip R. Stone'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 Philip R. Stone with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Philip R. Stone more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Philip R. Stone. 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 Philip R. Stone. The network helps show where Philip R. Stone may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Philip R. Stone
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Philip R. Stone.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Philip R. Stone 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 Philip R. Stone. Philip R. Stone is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Stone, Philip R.. (2018). Dark Tourism: Philosophy and Theory. Palgrave Macmillan eBooks.10 indexed citations
3.
Stone, Philip R.. (2018). The ‘Dark Tourist’ Experience [Editorial]. Palgrave Macmillan eBooks.10 indexed citations
4.
Stone, Philip R.. (2018). The ‘Spectacular Death’ in an Age of Dark Tourism. CLOK (University of Central Lancashire).
5.
Stone, Philip R.. (2017). Dark Tourism as ‘Spectacular Death’: Towards a new era of showcasing death in the early 21st century. CLOK (University of Central Lancashire).1 indexed citations
6.
Stone, Philip R.. (2016). Interpreting the Impossible: Enlightening the 'dark' in dark tourism. Interpretation A Journal of Bible and Theology. 21(2). 22–24.11 indexed citations
Stone, Philip R.. (2008). Review: The 25 Best World War II Sites: European Theatre. The ultimate traveller’s guide to battlefields, monuments and museums. Tourism Review International.1 indexed citations
14.
Stone, Philip R. & Richard Sharpley. (2008). Consuming dark tourism: A Thanatological Perspective. Annals of Tourism Research. 35(2). 574–595.494 indexed citations breakdown →
15.
Stone, Philip R.. (2007). Dark tourism: the ethics of exploiting tragedy. CLOK (University of Central Lancashire).5 indexed citations
16.
Stone, Philip R.. (2006). A dark tourism spectrum: Towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist sites, attractions and exhibitions. CLOK (University of Central Lancashire). 54(2). 145–160.424 indexed citations
17.
Stone, Philip R.. (2006). Making Absent Death Present: dark tourism and the sequestration of death in contemporary society. CLOK (University of Central Lancashire).
18.
Stone, Philip R.. (2005). Review: Niche Tourism – Contemporary Issues, Trends & Cases. Journal Of Vacation Marketing. 11(2).1 indexed citations
19.
Stone, Philip R.. (2005). Consuming Dark Tourism: a call for research. 3(5).19 indexed citations
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.