Cited by 176History of Science and Natural HistoryDiverse Historical and Scientific StudiesChinese history and philosophy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

British Naturalists in Qing China

FAN, Fa-ti·2004·Harvard University Press eBooks

Abstract

This book is the first comprehensive study on this topic. In a series of vivid chapters, Fa-ti Fan examines the research of British naturalists in China in relation to the history of natural history, of empire, and of Sino–Western relations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4159/9780674036680

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Metadata

Authors
FAN, F.-T.
Corresponding author
FAN, Fa-ti
Venue
Harvard University Press eBooks
Published
2004-12-31
OpenAlex
W3153095429
Cited by
176
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.94
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Harvard University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Natural History
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Diverse Historical and Scientific Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Chinese history and philosophy
Keywords
British naturalists, Qing China, history of natural history, imperialism, China–West relations, scientific expeditions, colonial science

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: British Naturalists in Qing China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4159/9780674036680
The paper
FAN, F.-T. (2004). British Naturalists in Qing China. Harvard University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674036680