Countries where authors publish in Ethnomusicology
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Ethnomusicology. 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 Ethnomusicology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ethnomusicology more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Ethnomusicology. 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 Ethnomusicology.
About Ethnomusicology
The 2.0k papers published in Ethnomusicology in the last decades have received a total of 15.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Ethnomusicology usually cover Music (1.0k papers), Cultural Studies (198 papers), Anthropology (204 papers), Archeology (15 papers) and Literature and Literary Theory (128 papers) specifically the topics of Diverse Musicological Studies (646 papers), Music History and Culture (568 papers), Musicology and Musical Analysis (390 papers), Folklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies (91 papers), Music Technology and Sound Studies (83 papers), Theater, Performance, and Music History (80 papers), Diversity and Impact of Dance (79 papers) and Asian Culture and Media Studies (73 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Ethnomusicology are Charles Keil, Christopher G. Small, Natalie Sarrazin, David J. Elliott, Thomas Turino, Bruno Nettl, Alan P. Merriam, Steven Feld, Peter Manuel and George List.
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.