This map shows the geographic impact of research published in T oung Pao. 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 T oung Pao with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites T oung Pao more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in T oung Pao. 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 T oung Pao.
About T oung Pao
The 616 papers published in T oung Pao in the last decades have received a total of 1.9k indexed citations . Papers published in T oung Pao usually cover Cultural Studies (127 papers), Sociology and Political Science (424 papers), Anthropology (72 papers), Religious studies (30 papers) and Language and Linguistics (29 papers) specifically the topics of Chinese history and philosophy (406 papers), Japanese History and Culture (118 papers), Eurasian Exchange Networks (53 papers), Vietnamese History and Culture Studies (43 papers), Indian and Buddhist Studies (29 papers), China's Ethnic Minorities and Relations (27 papers), China's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance (23 papers) and Linguistics and Cultural Studies (19 papers). The most active scholars publishing in T oung Pao are Michael Loewe, Yuri Pines, Michael Nylan, Nathan Sivin, Erik Zürcher, W. South Coblin, Martin Kern, Edward H. Schafer, Philip Clart and Raphaël Israéli.
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.