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.

Trackademia

Every graph on this site

Publications

  • Ranking Ranked table
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work
  • Works published per year Lines over years
    • Measure: Total, Mean per academic, Median per academic
    • Calendar year or years since PhD
    • In each year or cumulative
  • Citations received per year Lines over years
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work, Mean per academic, Median per academic
    • In each year or cumulative
  • Citation distribution Bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations
  • Citations by age of work Lines over years
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work
  • Publication type mix Ranked bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
  • Top venues Ranked bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications

Academicshere

Departments

  • Ranking Ranked table
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work, Mean per academic, Median per academic, Formula
  • Publications over time Lines over years
    • Measure: Total, Mean per academic, Median per academic, Formula
    • Calendar year or years since PhD
    • In each year or cumulative
  • Citations over time Lines over years
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations
    • Measure: Total, Mean per academic, Median per academic, Formula
    • In each year or cumulative
  • Makeup by tenure track Stacked bars
  • Output by rank Grouped bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work, Mean per academic, Median per academic, Formula
  • Academics ranked against academics Grouped bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
    • How many ranks (opens on 5)
  • Years to promotion Grouped bars
  • Journals used Stacked bars
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications

Journals

Fields

  • Ranking Ranked table
    • Value: Citations, Weighted citations, Publications
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work, Mean per academic, Median per academic
  • Departments by field Bars
    • Measure: Total, Mean per work, Median per work, Mean per academic, Median per academic
  • University rollup Ranked bars
  • Coverage by field Ranked bars

Trackademia

Search the whole site

Search a person, a department, a journal or the title of a work. A person’s name brings up their profile, their publications, their department and the journals they publish in.

Back to the list
Academic

Sean J. Westwood

close

Academic

RankAssociate
As of2026 · CV
DepartmentDartmouth Government
UniversityDartmouth
FieldPolitical Science
Scholarprofile

Totals

Publications47
Citations14,347
h-index28 · Scholar
Citations per year in post1,304.3
Years in post11 from the CV positions

Coverage

Works with a count40 of 47
Share85%

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 24 venues

The 15 holding the most of these works; 9 more hold at least one.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Scienc…9
PNAS Nexus4
The Monkey Cage4
American Journal of Political Science3
Political Behavior3
Public Opinion Quarterly3
The Hill2
The Journal of Politics2
American Political Science Review1
Annual Review of Political Science1
Cambridge University Press eBooks1
Communication Research1
Election Law Journal Rules Politics and Policy1
Electoral Studies1
European Journal of Political Research1

Collaborators 4 collaborators

Over every shown department of this field, not only the ones the filters select. 5 of these 47 works are held by another academic here; the column adds to more than that, because a work three of them hold is a shared work with each of the other two.

CollaboratorDepartmentShared works
Jonathan MummoloPrinceton Politics2
Donald P. GreenColumbia Political Science1
Joshua KallaYale Political Science1
Matthew LevenduskyPenn Political Science1

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 publication type, works 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 publication types, not the works switch, not the year window on publication - and no weight either. It is a profile total, so it does not match the works listed below.

Publications 47 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.

YearTitleVenuePublication typeCitations
2019The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United StatesAnnual Review of Political Sciencearticle5,063
2015Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group PolarizationAmerican Journal of Political Sciencearticle3,677
2014Selective Exposure in the Age of Social MediaCommunication Researcharticle1,578
2018The tie that divides: Cross-national evidence of the primacy of partyismEuropean Journal of Political Researcharticle541
2017The Limits of Partisan PrejudiceThe Journal of Politicsarticle438
2023Does Affective Polarization Undermine Democratic Norms or Accountability? Maybe NotAmerican Journal of Political Sciencearticle437
2012How Words and Money Cultivate a Personal Vote: The Effect of Legislator Credit Claiming on Constituent Credit AllocationAmerican Political Science Reviewarticle416
2022Current research overstates American support for political violenceProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle301
2017Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects and the effects of heterogeneous treatments with ensemble methodsPolitical Analysisarticle252
2014The Impression of Influence: Legislator Communication, Representation, and Democratic AccountabilityPrinceton University Press eBooksbook216
2020The inseparability of race and partisanship in the United StatesPolitical Behaviorarticle178
2025The Potential Existential Threat of Large Language Models to Online Survey ResearchProceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesarticle149
2020Projecting confidence: How the probabilistic horse race confuses and demobilizes the publicThe Journal of Politicsarticle135
2021The Limits of Partisan Loyalty.Political Behaviorarticle127
2018An exploration of Donald Trump’s allegations of massive voter fraud in the 2016 General ElectionElectoral Studiesarticle114
2021Advances in Experimental Political ScienceCambridge University Press eBooksedited volume89
2019Are there Still Limits on Partisan Prejudice?Public Opinion Quarterlyarticle88
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
2015The Role of Persuasion in Deliberative Opinion ChangePolitical Communicationarticle67
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
2010Social network analysis labs in Rarticle32
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
2016Marc J. Hetherington and Thomas J. Rudolph.Why Washington Won’t Work: Polarization, Political Trust, and the Governing Crisis. Chicago: University of Chicago P…Public Opinion 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
2020Election Forecasts Helped Elect Trump in 2016. It Could Happen Again in 2020USA Todayarticle
2018A New Survey Shows That the Republican Party Is Not the Party of TrumpThe Monkey Cagearticle
2017We Can’t Find Any Evidence of Voting Fraud in New HampshireThe Monkey Cagearticle
2016Can Trump Win Over the Supporters of His Republican Opponents? New Research Says: Maybe NotThe Monkey Cagearticle
2016We Checked Trump’s Allegations of Voter Fraud. We Found No Evidence at AllThe Monkey Cagearticle