Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research

381 indexed citations
published 2012
Journal
Medical Entomology and Zoology

In The Last Decade

doi.org/w68825697 →

Countries where authors are citing Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary 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 Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research.

About Multi-Sited Ethnography: Theory, Praxis and Locality in Contemporary Research

This paper, published in 2012, received 381 indexed citations . Written by Mark-Anthony Falzon. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (232 citations), Political Science and International Relations (66 citations) and Demography (64 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/w68825697.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026