Countries where authors publish in Modern Theology
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Modern Theology. 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 Modern Theology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Modern Theology more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Modern Theology. 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 Modern Theology.
About Modern Theology
The 892 papers published in Modern Theology in the last decades have received a total of 2.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Modern Theology usually cover Religious studies (394 papers), Philosophy (452 papers), Classics (47 papers), Sociology and Political Science (383 papers) and History (81 papers) specifically the topics of Biblical Studies and Interpretation (251 papers), Theology and Philosophy of Evil (204 papers), Christian Theology and Mission (197 papers), Religion and Society Interactions (166 papers), Medieval Philosophy and Theology (117 papers), Karl Barth and Christian Theology (110 papers), Religion, Ecology, and Ethics (88 papers) and American Constitutional Law and Politics (76 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Modern Theology are John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, William T. Cavanaugh, Miroslav Volf, David F. Ford, Rowan Williams, Paul L. Gavrilyuk, Kathryn Tanner, Denys Turner and Sarah Coakley.
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.