Minnesota Review

431 papers and 816 indexed citations i.

About

The 431 papers published in Minnesota Review in the last decades have received a total of 816 indexed citations. Papers published in Minnesota Review usually cover Sociology and Political Science (68 papers), Literature and Literary Theory (62 papers) and Cultural Studies (37 papers) specifically the topics of Exploration of Posthumanist Performativity in Social Sciences (16 papers), Geographies of human-animal interactions (14 papers) and Ecocriticism and Environmental Literature (12 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Minnesota Review are Barbara Herrnstein Smith, Andrew Cole, Jeffrey J. Williams, John Russo, Sherry Lee Linkon, Dominic Boyer, Jean Franco, David Roediger, Janell Watson and Kate Marshall.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Minnesota Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Minnesota 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 Minnesota Review.

Countries where authors publish in Minnesota Review

Since Specialization
Citations

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