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
Journal

Political Psychology

close

Citation weight

TierB
Weight in force
Weightingoff

Weight inputs

Each figure with its percentile among the ranked journals. A is the median, over the academics with a work here, of that academic’s citations to the works this site counts for them - never a Google Scholar profile total. Over every academic of this field, all years, whatever the filters select.

A · academics’ median7,606.0 · 63%
B · citations per work98.1 · 49%
N · works61 · 71%
P · academics31 · 72%
Formula result0.889

From this institution

Under these filters. A work with no citation count is unknown here, never a zero.

Works51
Citations5,077 over 45 of 51 works
Citations per counted work112.8
Weighted citations
Academics29
Departments8
First seen1986

Works placed per year

51 of these 51 works carry a year; an undated work is in no year. Works placed, under these filters.

Departments publishing there 8

DepartmentWorks
Brown Political Science12
Harvard Government9
Cornell Government8
Dartmouth Government8
Yale Political Science6
Columbia Political Science5
Penn Political Science4
Princeton Politics2

A work held by two departments counts once in each, so these add up to more than the works above.

Works placed there 51

YearTitleAcademicsCitations
2017The Nature and Origins of Misperceptions: Understanding False and Unsupported Beliefs about PoliticsBrendan Nyhan1,608
2012Reasoning is for Arguing: Explaining the Successes and Failures of DeliberationHélène Landemore510
1998Doubly Bound: The Impact of Gender and Race on the Politics of Black WomenClaudine Gay · Katherine Tate496
2004Prospect Theory in Political Science: Gains and Losses from the First DecadeROSE McDERMOTT295
2004Survival of the Fittest: Rhetoric during the Course of an Election Campaign.Jennifer Jerit220
2006Personal Income and Attitudes toward Redistribution: A Study of Lottery WinnersAlan S. Gerber · Donald P. Green194
2009Does Discussion Group Composition Affect Policy Preferences? Results From Three Randomized ExperimentsDonald P. Green125
2015Are Citizens Receiving the Treatment? Assessing a Key Link in Contextual Theories of Public Opinion and Political Behavior.Yamil Ricardo Velez124
2015Physiological Arousal and Political BeliefsDustin Tingley120
1992Risk Taking in the Iranian Hostage Rescue MissionROSE McDERMOTT115
2014Face-off: Facial Features and Strategic ChoiceDustin Tingley114
2003Self Prophecy Effects and Voter Turnout: An Experimental ReplicationAlan S. Gerber109
2013Beliefs Don’t Always Persevere: How Political Figures Are Punished When Positive Information about Them Is DiscreditedBrendan Nyhan108
2012The Heritability of Duty and Voter Turnout.Peter John Loewen88
2022Morbid Polarization: Exposure to COVID-19 and Partisan Disagreement about Pandemic ResponseThomas B. Pepinsky61
2018Republican Voters Prefer Candidates Who Have Conservative-Looking Faces: New Evidence from Exit PollsDustin Tingley59
2021The Racialization of International Trade,Diana C. Mutz · Edward D. Mansfield · Eunji Kim56
1995When Worldviews Collide: Conflicting Assumptions about Human Behavior Held by Rational Actor Theory and Islamic FundamentalismRoxanne L. Euben55
2018Fighting the Past: Perceptions of Control, Historical Misperceptions, and Corrective Information in the Israeli-Palestinian ConflictBrendan Nyhan54
2016Power, Gender, and Group DiscussionTali Mendelberg49
2019Moral Hazard: German Public Opinion on the Greek Debt CrisisKathleen E. Powers48
2024Projection in Politicians’ Perceptions of Public Opinion.Peter John Loewen47
2004Crossing No Man’s Land: Cooperation from the TrenchesROSE McDERMOTT45
2018Analytic Confidence in Political Decision Making: Experimental Evidence from National Security ProfessionalsJeffrey A. Friedman34
2012The Emergence of Evolutionary Political ScienceROSE McDERMOTT33
1986Political Parties and Foreign Policy: A Structuralist ApproachGary King32
2012The Political Psychology of Biology, Genetics and BehaviorROSE McDERMOTT32
2002Framing, Uncertainty and Hostile Communications in a Crisis ExperimentROSE McDERMOTT30
2020Follow Your Heart: Could Psychophysiology Be Associated With Political Discussion Network Homogeneity?Charles T. Mcclean25
2016Negative A↵ectivity, Political Contention and Turnout: A Genopolitics Field Experiment.Peter John Loewen25
2005Bringing the Group Back into Political PsychologyTali Mendelberg24
2018Do Subtle Linguistic Interventions Priming a Social Identity as a Voter Have Outsized Effects on Voter Turnout? Evidence from a New Replication ExperimentAlan S. Gerber · Gregory Alain Huber23
2023Motivated to Forgive? Partisan Scandals and Party Supporters.Peter John Loewen23
2012Broadening Political PsychologyROSE McDERMOTT20
2006IntroductionROSE McDERMOTT18
2022Reversing the Causal Arrow: Politics’ Influence on Religious ChoicesMichele F. Margolis17
2011Affective Forecasting Errors in the 2008 Election: Underpredicting HappinessDean Lacy14
2018Implementation Intentions, Information, and Voter Turnout: An Experimental StudyPeter John Loewen13
2004Editor’s IntroductionROSE McDERMOTT6
2025What Personality Traits Do Citizens Want Politicians to Have? Observational and Experimental Evidence of Citizens Preferences in Three CountriesPeter John Loewen3
2017Donald Trump and the Politics of Anxiety and ResentmentJennifer Hochschild2
2025Dealing with Uncertainty and Cognitive Biases in International Politics: A Critical DialogueJeffrey A. Friedman1
2024The Politics of Pooling Risk: Compassion, Self- Interest, and HealthcareTalbot M. Andrews1
2025Depolarization and Its Discontents: Experimental Evidence on Affective Polarization and Willingness to Confront Racism and Misinformation from Two Online WorkshopsRobert A. Blair1
2004Editor’s Introduction (Part Two)ROSE McDERMOTT0
2008The Averaged American: Surveys, Citizens, and the Making of a Mass Public – By Sarah E. IgoJennifer Hochschild
2000Diversity in the power elite: Have women and minorities reached the top?Jennifer Hochschild
2000American ElitesJennifer Hochschild
2024Do subtle linguistic interventions priming a social identity as a voter have outsized effects on voter turnout? Evidence from a new replication experiment (vol 39, pg 925, 2018)Alan S. Gerber · Gregory Alain Huber
2026Backsliding on democracy: A critical dialogueCarlo Prato
2026Affective Polarization: From Concepts to Measures.Matthew Levendusky

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 45 of these 51 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.