Thomas Kselman
- History top 2%
- Sociology and Political Science
- History and Philosophy of Science top 5%
- Anthropology top 10%
- Political Science and International Relations
- Co-authors
- Susan JusterPeter N. StearnsCharles RearickReynaldo C. IletoDavid ZaretMichaël GilsenanKaren K. FieldsJean Comaroff
- Topics
- Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis (16 papers)European Political History Analysis (9 papers)Diverse Cultural and Historical Studies (5 papers)
- Partner nations
- United States
In The Last Decade
Thomas Kselman
23 papers receiving 133 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 40
- History 86
- Sociology and Political Science 67
- History and Philosophy of Science 51
- Anthropology 42
- Political Science and International Relations 38
Countries citing papers authored by Thomas Kselman
This map shows the geographic impact of Thomas Kselman'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 Thomas Kselman with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Thomas Kselman more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Thomas Kselman
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Thomas Kselman. 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 Thomas Kselman. The network helps show where Thomas Kselman may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Thomas Kselman
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Thomas Kselman. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Thomas Kselman 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 Thomas Kselman. Thomas Kselman is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 2 | Conscience and Conversion: Religious Liberty in Post-Revolutionary France | 3 |
| 3 | 1 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 5 | 4 | |
| 6 | 4 | |
| 7 | 3 | |
| 8 | 1 | |
| 9 | 2 | |
| 10 | 2 | |
| 11 | 3 | |
| 12 | 15 | |
| 13 | 1 | |
| 14 | 18 | |
| 15 | 41 | |
| 16 | 18 | |
| 17 | 10 | |
| 18 | 7 | |
| 19 | Miracles & Prophecies in Nineteenth Century France | 36 |
| 20 | 1 |
About Thomas Kselman
Thomas Kselman is a scholar working on History and Philosophy of Science, History and Cultural Studies, having authored 29 papers that have together received 216 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis (16 papers), European Political History Analysis (9 papers) and Diverse Cultural and Historical Studies (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in History and Philosophy of Science (51 citations), History (86 citations) and Religious studies (28 citations). Thomas Kselman has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Susan Juster, Peter N. Stearns, Charles Rearick, Reynaldo C. Ileto, David Zaret, Michaël Gilsenan, Karen K. Fields, Jean Comaroff, Hue-Tam Ho Tai and Nicholas Wolterstorff. Their work appears in journals such as The American Historical Review, The Journal of Interdisciplinary History and Sociological Forum.
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.