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

Electoral Studies

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’ median6,179.0 · 49%
B · citations per work140.1 · 66%
N · works45 · 64%
P · academics31 · 72%
Formula result0.906

From this institution

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

Works19
Citations855 over 19 of 19 works
Citations per counted work45.0
Weighted citations
Academics18
Departments7
First seen2017

Works placed per year

19 of these 19 works carry a year; an undated work is in no year. Works placed, under these filters.

Departments publishing there 7

DepartmentWorks
Princeton Politics4
Yale Political Science4
Columbia Political Science3
Cornell Government2
Dartmouth Government2
Harvard Government2
Penn Political Science2

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

Works placed there 19

YearTitleAcademicsCitations
2018An exploration of Donald Trump’s allegations of massive voter fraud in the 2016 General ElectionSean J. Westwood114
2017Economic Performance and Incumbents’ Support in Latin AmericaMaria Victoria Murillo113
2018Do Electoral Handouts Affect Voting Behavior?Leonard Wantchekon111
2017Incumbency Advantage and Candidate Characteristics in Open-List Proportional Representation Systems: Evidence from IndonesiaThomas B. Pepinsky96
2017Social Pressure and Voting: A Field Experiment Conducted in a High-Salience ElectionDonald P. Green80
2020After Citizens United: How Outside Spending Shapes American DemocracyCarlo Prato69
2017Local Candidates and Voter Mobilization: Evidence from Historical Two-Round Elections in NorwayDaniel M. Smith66
2017Why Don't People Vote in U.S. Primary Elections? Assessing Theoretical Explanations for Reduced ParticipationAlan S. Gerber · Gregory Alain Huber45
2018Measuring Issue-Salience in Voters’ PreferencesStephen Daniel Ansolabehere44
2021The electoral consequences of anti-Muslim prejudiceLafleur Stephens-Dougan32
2022Shoring up Power: Electoral Reform and the Consolidation of Authoritarian RuleJennifer Gandhi19
2021Communicating safety precautions can help maintain in-person voter turnout during a pandemicPeter John Loewen17
2021Evaluations of candidates' non- policy characteristics from issue positions: Evidence of valence spilloverAlan S. Gerber · Gregory Alain Huber14
2020Campaign Styles: Persistency in Campaign Resource AllocationHye Young You14
2022Does the Monetary Cost of Abstaining Increase Turnout? Causal Evidence from Peru.Guadalupe Tuñón9
2025Losing Predicts Perceptions That Elections Were Decided by Fraud, but Margin of Loss and Candidate Race Do NotBrendan Nyhan6
2026Getting to Know Her: Information and Gender Bias in Preferential Voting SystemsDaniel M. Smith5
2026How Do Underrepresented Voters View Electoral System Trade-Offs?Charles T. Mcclean1
2025Self-Interest and Voter Support for Defund the PoliceMarcel F. Roman0

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 19 of these 19 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.