This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Subjectivity. 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 Subjectivity with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Subjectivity more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Subjectivity. 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 Subjectivity.
About Subjectivity
The 358 papers published in Subjectivity in the last decades have received a total of 5.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Subjectivity usually cover Cultural Studies (76 papers), Geography, Planning and Development (42 papers) and Philosophy (59 papers) specifically the topics of Posthumanist Ethics and Activism (66 papers), Geographies of human-animal interactions (40 papers), Psychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics (37 papers), Foucault, Power, and Ethics (30 papers), Gender, Feminism, and Media (27 papers), Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism (21 papers), Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications (16 papers) and Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations (14 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Subjectivity are Engin F. Isin, Margaret Wetherell, Rosalind Gill, Michelle Murphy, Vincanne Adams, Adele E. Clarke, Sam Binkley, Isabelle Stengers, Annemarie Mol and Thomas J. Csordas.
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.