Countries where authors publish in The American Archivist
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in The American Archivist. 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 The American Archivist with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The American Archivist more than expected).
Fields of papers published in The American Archivist
This network shows the impact of papers published in The American Archivist. 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 The American Archivist.
About The American Archivist
The 1.5k papers published in The American Archivist in the last decades have received a total of 8.3k indexed citations . Papers published in The American Archivist usually cover Conservation (876 papers), Space and Planetary Science (206 papers) and Library and Information Sciences (44 papers) specifically the topics of Digital and Traditional Archives Management (860 papers), Archaeological Research and Protection (206 papers), Library Science and Information Systems (126 papers), Research Data Management Practices (83 papers), Oral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis (55 papers), Digital Humanities and Scholarship (41 papers), Museums and Cultural Heritage (37 papers) and Library Science and Administration (31 papers). The most active scholars publishing in The American Archivist are Elizabeth Yakel, Randall C. Jimerson, Warren Reid, Helen R. Tibbo, Wendy Duff, Geoffrey Yeo, Kimberly Christen, Dennis Meißner, Tom Nesmith and James O’Toole.
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.