Argumentation and Advocacy

536 papers and 3.6k indexed citations i.

About

The 536 papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy in the last decades have received a total of 3.6k indexed citations. Papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy usually cover Philosophy (269 papers), Communication (138 papers) and Literature and Literary Theory (126 papers) specifically the topics of Rhetoric and Communication Studies (245 papers), Discourse Analysis in Language Studies (96 papers) and Social Media and Politics (71 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Argumentation and Advocacy are G. Thomas Goodnight, Kevin Michael DeLuca, Daniel J. O’Keefe, William L. Benoit, Timothy L. Sellnow, Cara A. Finnegan, Robert Asen, Douglas Walton, Gordon R. Mitchell and Catherine Helen Palczewski.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy.

Countries where authors publish in Argumentation and Advocacy

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Argumentation and Advocacy. 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 papers published in Argumentation and Advocacy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Argumentation and Advocacy more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025