Luso-Brazilian Review

296 papers and 536 indexed citations i.

About

The 296 papers published in Luso-Brazilian Review in the last decades have received a total of 536 indexed citations. Papers published in Luso-Brazilian Review usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (94 papers), Sociology and Political Science (84 papers) and Philosophy (66 papers) specifically the topics of Literature, Culture, and Criticism (82 papers), Cultural, Media, and Literary Studies (58 papers) and History of Colonial Brazil (33 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Luso-Brazilian Review are Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Seth Garfield, Walter Hawthorne, Mariana P. Candido, Regina Horta Duarte, Sidney M. Greenfield, Idelber Avelar, Ana Lucia Araújo, Andréia Cristina de Melo and Mark J. Osiel.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Luso-Brazilian Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Luso-Brazilian Review. 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 Luso-Brazilian Review.

Countries where authors publish in Luso-Brazilian Review

Since Specialization
Citations

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

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

Rankless by CCL
2025