The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.
- Authors
- F. R. Leavis
- Journal
- Medical Entomology and Zoology
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w42733437 →Countries where authors are citing The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.
This map shows the geographic impact of The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.. 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 The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.
This network shows the impact of The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad..
About The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.
This paper, published in 1963, received 121 indexed citations . Written by F. R. Leavis covering the research area of Literature and Literary Theory. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Literature and Literary Theory (82 citations), Sociology and Political Science (36 citations) and Cultural Studies (15 citations). Published in Medical Entomology and Zoology.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w42733437.