IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/8372e.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why do some academic articles receive more citations from policy communities?

Author

Listed:
  • Ma, Ji

    (The University of Texas at Austin)

  • Cheng, Yuan

Abstract

We (1) present the landscape of the citations of Public Administration and Policy (PAP) scholarly articles in policy documents, and (2) examine influencing factors along three dimensions: collaborative teams, cross-disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms. Using data from the 30 most-cited PAP peer-reviewed journals and 38,062 documents from 1,107 policy institutions, we find that 10.1% of all PAP scholarship receives high citations from both academics and policy communities. Collaborative teams, cross-disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms can all increase the citations within policy communities, yet the relationships are not linear. Non-academic authors can consistently attract more policy citations, whether publishing alone or collaborating with academics. An article should ideally cite no more than 13 disciplinary subjects. No significant trade-off between scholarly and policy impact as scholarly citations and the academic reputation of authors often translate into policy citations. These findings offer novel and concrete insights into optimizing academic research for policy impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Ma, Ji & Cheng, Yuan, 2024. "Why do some academic articles receive more citations from policy communities?," OSF Preprints 8372e, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:8372e
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/8372e
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/668df2a2b126380032361a35/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/8372e?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Stephen Carley & Alan L. Porter, 2012. "A forward diversity index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 407-427, February.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2019. "Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: Which strategy pays off?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 51-57.
    3. Ronald Rousseau, 2018. "The repeat rate: from Hirschman to Stirling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 645-653, July.
    4. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    5. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    6. Meijun Liu & Sijie Yang & Yi Bu & Ning Zhang, 2023. "Female early-career scientists have conducted less interdisciplinary research in the past six decades: evidence from doctoral theses," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    8. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    9. Andrés Pazmiño & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Darryl Low Choy, 2018. "Towards Comprehensive Policy Integration for the Sustainability of Small Islands: A Landscape-Scale Planning Approach for the Galápagos Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-29, April.
    10. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    11. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    12. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    13. Pitambar Gautam & Ryuichi Yanagiya, 2012. "Reflection of cross-disciplinary research at Creative Research Institution (Hokkaido University) in the Web of Science database: appraisal and visualization using bibliometry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 101-111, October.
    14. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    15. Dellaportas, Steven & Xu, Lina & Yang, Zhiqiang, 2022. "The level of cross-disciplinarity in cross-disciplinary accounting research: analysis and suggestions for improvement," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Jon Garner & Alan L. Porter & Nils C. Newman, 2014. "Distance and velocity measures: using citations to determine breadth and speed of research impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(3), pages 687-703, September.
    17. Lorenzo Cassi & Wilfriedo Mescheba & Élisabeth Turckheim, 2014. "How to evaluate the degree of interdisciplinarity of an institution?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1871-1895, December.
    18. Solomon, Gregg E.A. & Youtie, Jan & Carley, Stephen & Porter, Alan L., 2019. "What people learn about how people learn: An analysis of citation behavior and the multidisciplinary flow of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    19. Dorta-González, P. & Dorta-González, M.I., 2013. "Impact maturity times and citation time windows: The 2-year maximum journal impact factor," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 593-602.
    20. Andrew S. Hanks & Kevin M. Kniffin & Xuechao Qian & Bo Wang & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2022. "First Foot Forward: A Two-Step Econometric Method for Parsing and Estimating the Impacts of Multiple Identities," NBER Working Papers 30293, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:osfxxx:8372e. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.