The Chaucer Review

486 papers and 819 indexed citations i.

About

The 486 papers published in The Chaucer Review in the last decades have received a total of 819 indexed citations. Papers published in The Chaucer Review usually cover Classics (424 papers), History (212 papers) and Literature and Literary Theory (126 papers) specifically the topics of Medieval Literature and History (422 papers), Historical Studies of British Isles (163 papers) and Folklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies (99 papers). The most active scholars publishing in The Chaucer Review are Alexandra Gillespie, Simon Horobin, Sarah Stanbury, William F. Woods, Thomas J. Farrell, John M. Bowers, Marjorie Curry Woods, Peter Robinson, Gerald Morgan and Warren S. Smith.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in The Chaucer Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in The Chaucer 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 The Chaucer Review.

Countries where authors publish in The Chaucer Review

Since Specialization
Citations

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