Dao
- Sociology and Political Science
- Social Psychology
- Political Science and International Relations
- Philosophy
- Cultural Studies top 10%
- Fields
- Religious studies (76 papers)Cultural Studies (84 papers)Sociology and Political Science (444 papers)
- Topics
- Chinese history and philosophyJapanese History and CultureIndian and Buddhist Studies
In The Last Decade
Dao
373 papers receiving 1.4k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 111
- Sociology and Political Science 1.3k
- Social Psychology 389
- Political Science and International Relations 384
- Philosophy 290
- Cultural Studies 274
Countries where authors publish in Dao
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Dao. 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 Dao with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dao more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Dao
This network shows the impact of papers published in Dao. 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 Dao.
About Dao
The 611 papers published in Dao in the last decades have received a total of 1.9k indexed citations . Papers published in Dao usually cover Religious studies (76 papers), Cultural Studies (84 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (444 papers) specifically the topics of Chinese history and philosophy (427 papers), Japanese History and Culture (82 papers) and Indian and Buddhist Studies (75 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Dao are Chenyang Li, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Amy Olberding, Justin Tiwald, David B. Wong, Edward Slingerland, Bryan W. Van Norden, Chris Fraser, Qingping Liu and Michael Slote.
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.