Ben Jonson Journal
- Topics
- Joseph Conrad and LiteratureLiterature: history, themes, analysisScottish History and National Identity
In The Last Decade
Ben Jonson Journal
56 papers receiving 110 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 49
- Literature and Literary Theory 146
- History 81
- Classics 54
- Sociology and Political Science 39
- Anthropology 37
Countries where authors publish in Ben Jonson Journal
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Ben Jonson Journal. 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 Ben Jonson Journal with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ben Jonson Journal more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Ben Jonson Journal
This network shows the impact of papers published in Ben Jonson Journal. 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 Ben Jonson Journal.
About Ben Jonson Journal
The 227 papers published in Ben Jonson Journal in the last decades have received a total of 269 indexed citations . Papers published in Ben Jonson Journal usually cover Classics (27 papers), Literature and Literary Theory (76 papers) and History (45 papers) specifically the topics of Joseph Conrad and Literature (38 papers), Literature: history, themes, analysis (28 papers) and Scottish History and National Identity (25 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Ben Jonson Journal are Ian Donaldson, Richard Dutton, Patrick Phillips, Brian Vickers, John Jowett, Martin Butler, Gabriel Egan, Robert L. Mack, Thomas Rist and Robert C. Evans.
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.