Trackademia

Welcome to Trackademia

The idea behind Trackademia is to build on existing academic databases like Google Scholar and OpenAlex so that you can trust the data and use it for whatever you want. That comes down to two things.

More data, and more ways to use it. We aggregate publication data from every major source into a single dataset and add information pulled from faculty CVs. Then we let you slice it however you want: choose which sources to build from, write your own formulas, weight journals, adjust for department size.

More accurate, and honest about where it isn’t. We focus on a smaller set of schools so we can verify everything carefully. Faculty lists come from department websites rather than being inferred from publication records, so we know who should be in the data before we go looking. When we can’t find data on someone, we record the gap instead of dropping them. Every number comes with a coverage rate you can check against ground truth.

Everything in Trackademia is built from seven units. AI merges duplicate records across sources and tags each publication so these categories hold up:

  • Publication — citation counts, authors, journal, peer review status, and more
  • Publication group — versions of the same work combined into one entity, such as a working paper and the article it became
  • Academic
  • Department
  • University
  • Field
  • Journal

There are two modes. In Database mode you browse the underlying records and filter by any of the seven units. In Analytics mode you get graphs and comparisons, and you switch views to compare two departments, compare one department against the average of the others, or see them all at once. Tabs let you focus on a particular level of the data.

Back to the list
Academic

Sean J. Westwood

close

Academic

RankAssociate
As of2026 · CV
DepartmentDartmouth Government
UniversityDartmouth
FieldPolitical Science
Scholarprofile

Totals

Publications25
Citations1,335
h-index28 · Scholar
Citations per year in post121.4
Years in post11 from the CV positions

Coverage

Works with a count23 of 25
Share92%

Positions

Faculty Director of the Open Inquiry Program2026–
Visiting Fellow, Institution for Social and P…2026–2027
Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford…2023–
W. Glenn Campbell and Rita Ricardo-Campbell N…2022–2023
Associate Professor, Dartmouth College2021–
Assistant Professor, Dartmouth College2015–2021
Postdoctoral Fellow, Center for the Study of…2014–2015

Top venues 12 venues

The 8 holding the most of these works; 4 more hold at least one.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Scienc…9
PNAS Nexus4
American Journal of Political Science2
The Hill2
Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy1
Journal of Experimental Political Science1
Nature Human Behaviour1
PLoS ONE1

Publications per year

Works this academic published in each year, by the year each work appeared; an undated work is in no year, and a work two colleagues wrote counts for each of them. The kind, works and year filters decide which works are here at all.

Citations per year

Citations received in each year, from this academic’s verified Scholar profile, which counts every citation to everything they ever wrote: no publication filter reaches this line - not the kinds, not the works switch, not the year window on publication - and no journal weight either. It is a profile total, so it does not match the works listed below.

Publications 25 works

Every work these filters select, most cited first and the works with no count at the end: a work nobody has a figure for is unknown, never a zero to be ranked among the works that have one, and it prints an em dash. Each figure is that work’s own citations - Scholar’s count where there is one, else OpenAlex’s - and is not weighted.

YearTitleVenueKindCitations
2023Does Affective Polarization Undermine Democratic Norms or Accountability? Maybe NotAmerican Journal of Political Sciencearticle437
2022Current research overstates American support for political violenceProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle301
2025The Potential Existential Threat of Large Language Models to Online Survey ResearchProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle149
2024Uncommon and Nonpartisan: Anti-Democratic Attitudes In The American PublicProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle82
2024Effects of a US Supreme Court ruling to restrict abortion rightsNature Human Behaviourarticle75
2024Persistent Polarization: The Unexpected Durability of Political Animosity Around US ElectionsScience Advancesarticle46
2022Racial identity, group consciousness, and attitudes: A framework for assessing multiracial self-classificationAmerican Journal of Political Sciencearticle39
2022The partisanship of bipartisanship: How representatives use bipartisan assertions to cultivate supportPolitical Behaviorarticle35
2025Why Depolarization is Hard: Evaluating Attempts to Decrease Partisan Animosity in AmericaProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle34
2024Correcting misperceptions of partisan opponents is not effective at treating democratic illsPNAS Nexusarticle32
2024The July 2024 Trump Assassination Attempt was Followed by Lower In-Group Support for Partisan Violence and Increased Group UnityProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle22
2022Reply to Kalmoe and Mason: The pitfalls of using surveys to measure low-prevalence attitudes and behaviorProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle22
2024Affective polarization is uniformly distributed across American statesPNAS Nexusarticle21
2024Who are the Election Skeptics? Evidence from the 2022 Midterm ElectionsElection Law Journal Rules Politics and Policyarticle13
2023Which Police Departments Want Reform? Barriers to Evidence-Based Policymaking.Journal of Experimental Political Sciencearticle11
2026Reply to Van der Stigchel et al.: Empirical evidence that AI survey contamination is real and substantialProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle8
2025No news is good news? The declining information value of broadcast news in AmericaPLoS ONEarticle3
2026Entrepreneurs of conflict: A descriptive analysis of when and how political elites use divisive rhetoricPNAS Nexusarticle2
2026Systemic electioneering from the evangelical pulpit: Evidence from a computational analysisProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle1
2026Levels of Office and Voter Accountability for Democratic Norm ViolationsPublic Opinion Quarterlyarticle1
2024Information Diets in an Information Desert: Selective Exposure in a Restricted Information EnvironmentThe China Quarterlyarticle1
2026Public responses to atrocities depend on partisanship and context, not labelsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle0
2026Entrepreneurs of Conflict: Media Attention without ConsequencesPNAS Nexusarticle0
2024Democrats’ Commitment to the Democracy Message Could Cost Them the ElectionThe Hillarticle
2022We Study Political Polarization. The Midterm Election Results Make Us HopefulThe Hillarticle