International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music

1.5k citations
353 papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

  • Music top 2%
    • Musicology and Musical Analysis
    • Music History and Culture
    • Diverse Musicological Studies
    • Diverse Music Education Insights
    • Cultural Industries and Urban Development

Papers in

  • Music 172
    • Musicology and Musical Analysis 118
    • Diverse Musicological Studies 68
    • Music History and Culture 43
    • Diverse Music Education Insights 15
    • Theater, Performance, and Music History 13

International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music

165 papers receiving 862 citations

Peers

International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music
Comparison fields: 5 of 109
  • Music 685
  • Urban Studies 182
  • Visual Arts and Performing Arts 145
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 293
  • Communication 97
Replace Asian Music with:
Asian Music United States
Journal of the Royal Musical Association United Kingdom
twentieth-century music United States
Ethnomusicology Forum United Kingdom
Journal of Popular Music Studies United States
Dance Research United Kingdom
Musicology Australia Australia
Black Music Research Journal United States
Journal of Musicological Research United States
Grey Room United States
International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music relative to Asian Music United States Asian Music's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.2×
Asian Music · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music. 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 International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music.

About International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music

The 353 papers published in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music in the last decades have received a total of 1.5k indexed citations . Papers published in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music usually cover Music (172 papers), General Arts and Humanities (9 papers), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (20 papers), Anthropology (34 papers) and Literature and Literary Theory (38 papers) specifically the topics of Musicology and Musical Analysis (118 papers), Diverse Musicological Studies (68 papers), Music History and Culture (43 papers), Historical and Literary Studies (28 papers), Music Technology and Sound Studies (27 papers), Historical Influence and Diplomacy (23 papers), Diverse Music Education Insights (15 papers) and Theater, Performance, and Music History (13 papers). The most active scholars publishing in International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music are William G. Bowen, William J. Baumöl, Jean-Jacques Nattiez, Carolyn Abbate, Antoni Pizà, Ivo Supic̆ić, William Weber, George H. Lewis, Robin Moore and Peregrine Horden.

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