IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v127y2022i5d10.1007_s11192-022-04317-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deciphering the US News and World Report Ranking of US Chemistry Graduate Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Masaru Kuno

    (University of Notre Dame
    University of Notre Dame)

  • Mary Prorok

    (University of Notre Dame)

  • Shubin Zhang

    (University of Notre Dame)

  • Huy Huynh

    (University of Notre Dame)

  • Thurston Miller

    (University of Notre Dame)

Abstract

The US News & World Reports (US News) regularly publishes highly influential rankings of graduate programs in the sciences. These rankings are exclusively based on reputational surveys sent to a small subset of faculty experts in a given discipline, namely Directors of Graduate Studies and Department Chairs. No other quantitative metric is used to establish a graduate program’s rank. If reputation alone establishes US News rank, what quantifiable metrics underlie it? The question is an important one when considering that these rankings are widely consulted within higher education circles. These can impact a particular program’s ability to attract top faculty, graduate students, and other researchers who directly contribute to the program’s collective publication, citation, and funding profiles. In this study, we focus on US News’ most recently published peer assessment scores for chemistry graduate programs and establish seven departmental and institutional metrics that correlate with these scores. We find that central to US News rank is a chemistry program’s research visibility and impact as quantified by the median career h-index of its tenured and tenure track (T/TT) faculty, departmental T/TT size, and per capita research expenditures. These three predictor variables account for approximately 84% of the total variability in reported average peer assessment scores. When prestige indicators such as institutional membership in the American Association of Universities and percentage T/TT faculty membership in the US National Academy of Sciences are included, over 88% of the variability in average peer assessment score is accounted for. In whole, a seven-variable statistical model we develop explains nearly 91% of the variability in US News’ average peer assessment scores, which form the basis for its ranking of graduate US chemistry programs. We also explore the possibility that an anchoring effect influences reputational scores by analyzing how rank change complementary cumulative distribution functions evolve with time, following release of the initial 1994 US News and World Reports chemistry graduate program rankings. We find that the likelihood of rank changes increase with time with a t $$_\text {1/2}$$ 1/2 of $$\sim$$ ∼ 20 years.

Suggested Citation

  • Masaru Kuno & Mary Prorok & Shubin Zhang & Huy Huynh & Thurston Miller, 2022. "Deciphering the US News and World Report Ranking of US Chemistry Graduate Programs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2131-2150, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04317-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04317-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04317-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-022-04317-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Izzat Alsmadi & Z. W. Taylor & Joshua Childs, 2020. "U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges rankings: Which institutional metrics contribute to sustained stratification?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1851-1869, September.
    2. Themis Lazaridis, 2010. "Ranking university departments using the mean h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 211-216, February.
    3. Lokman I. Meho & Kiduk Yang, 2007. "Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(13), pages 2105-2125, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aniruddha Maiti & Sai Shi & Slobodan Vucetic, 2023. "An ablation study on the use of publication venue quality to rank computer science departments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4197-4218, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Takanori Ida & Naomi Fukuzawa, 2013. "Effects of large-scale research funding programs: a Japanese case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1253-1273, March.
    2. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2011. "Structured evaluation of the scientific output of academic research groups by recent h-based indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 64-74.
    3. Aniruddha Maiti & Sai Shi & Slobodan Vucetic, 2023. "An ablation study on the use of publication venue quality to rank computer science departments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4197-4218, August.
    4. Borrett, Stuart R. & Sheble, Laura & Moody, James & Anway, Evan C., 2018. "Bibliometric review of ecological network analysis: 2010–2016," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 382(C), pages 63-82.
    5. Nianhang Xu & Winnie P. H. Poon & Kam C. Chan, 2014. "Contributing Institutions and Authors in International Business Research: A Quality-Based Assessment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 735-755, October.
    6. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2012. "Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 343-351, May.
    7. Nikolaos A. Kazakis, 2014. "Bibliometric evaluation of the research performance of the Greek civil engineering departments in National and European context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 505-525, October.
    8. Dejian Yu & Sun Meng, 2018. "An overview of biomass energy research with bibliometric indicators," Energy & Environment, , vol. 29(4), pages 576-590, June.
    9. Elena Rivo-López & Mónica Villanueva-Villar & Alberto Vaquero-García, 2016. "Family office: a new category in family business research?," Working Papers. Collection C: Family business 1601, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    10. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    11. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1160-1177.
    12. Wildgaard, Lorna, 2016. "A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1055-1078.
    13. García-Pérez, Miguel A., 2011. "Strange attractors in the Web of Science database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 214-218.
    14. Loizides, Orestis-Stavros & Koutsakis, Polychronis, 2017. "On evaluating the quality of a computer science/computer engineering conference," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 541-552.
    15. Kjetil K. Haugen & Frode E. Sandnes, 2016. "The new Norwegian incentive system for publication: from bad to worse," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1299-1306, November.
    16. Kam C. Chan & Anna Fung & Hung-Gay Fung & Jot Yau, 2016. "A Citation Analysis of Business Ethics Research: A Global Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 557-573, July.
    17. Petridis, Konstantinos & Malesios, Chrisovalantis & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Thanassoulis, Emmanuel, 2013. "Efficiency analysis of forestry journals: Suggestions for improving journals’ quality," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 505-521.
    18. Mike Thelwall, 2012. "Journal impact evaluation: a webometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 429-441, August.
    19. Lala Hajibayova, 2020. "(Un)theorizing citizen science: Investigation of theories applied to citizen science studies," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(8), pages 916-926, August.
    20. João Paulo Coelho Ribeiro & Fábio Duarte & Ana Paula Matias Gama, 2022. "Does microfinance foster the development of its clients? A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04317-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.