Countries where authors publish in Journal of Vocational Education and Training
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Journal of Vocational Education and Training. 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 Journal of Vocational Education and Training with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Journal of Vocational Education and Training more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Journal of Vocational Education and Training
This network shows the impact of papers published in Journal of Vocational Education and Training. 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 Journal of Vocational Education and Training.
About Journal of Vocational Education and Training
The 1.1k papers published in Journal of Vocational Education and Training in the last decades have received a total of 15.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Journal of Vocational Education and Training usually cover Human Factors and Ergonomics (297 papers), Education (827 papers) and Public Administration (48 papers) specifically the topics of Education Systems and Policy (420 papers), Higher Education and Employability (316 papers) and Innovative Education and Learning Practices (297 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Journal of Vocational Education and Training are Stephen Billett, James Avis, Paul Ryan, Martin Mulder, Roger Bennett, Terry Hyland, Ian R. Cornford, John P. Hughes, Tom Baum and Jocelyn Robson.
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.