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 Research Quarterly

close

Citation weight

Tierunranked
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’ median3,871.0 · 19%
B · citations per work60.0 · 34%
N · works36 · 49%
P · academics27 · 64%
Formula result0.469

From this institution

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

Works19
Citations638 over 18 of 19 works
Citations per counted work35.4
Weighted citations
Academics16
Departments8
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 8

DepartmentWorks
Dartmouth Government4
Harvard Government3
Penn Political Science3
Brown Political Science2
Columbia Political Science2
Cornell Government2
Princeton Politics2
Yale Political Science1

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
2017Self Interest, Beliefs, and Policy Opinions: Understanding How Economic Beliefs Affect Immigration Policy Preferences.Alan S. Gerber · Gregory Alain Huber131
2018When Do Family Ties Matter? The Duration of Female Suffrage and Women’s Path to High Political OfficeJulia Gray75
2017Media Scandals Are Political Events: How contextual factors affect public controversies over alleged misconduct by U.S. governorsBrendan Nyhan65
2017Political Effects of Having Undocumented ParentsMichael Jones-Correa46
2020Enlightened One-Party Rule? Ideological Differences between Chinese Communist Party Members and the Mass PublicJunyan Jiang43
2018How Gender Conditions the Way Citizens Evaluate and Engage with Their RepresentativesMia Costa38
2020How Internet Search Undermines the Validity of Political Knowledge Measures.Jennifer Jerit31
2020Regionalism in New Democracies: The Authoritarian Origins of Voter-Party LinkagesElizabeth R. Nugent31
2020Do Voters Judge the Performance of Female and Male Politicians Di↵erently? Experimental Evidence from the United States and Australia.Peter John Loewen31
2018Accountability, Loss Aversion, and Elected Representatives’ Management of Risk: An Experimental Study with Local Politicians in the United States.Peter John Loewen30
2021Elite Messaging and Partisan Consumerism: An Evaluation of President Trump’s Tweets and Polarization of Corporate Brand ImagesDonald P. Green29
2021Voter Beliefs and Strategic Voting in Two-Round ElectionsRebecca Weitz-Shapiro24
2022How Social Ties with Undocumented Immigrants Motivate Latinx Political ParticipationMarcel F. Roman22
2024On the Internet, No One Knows You’re an Activist: Patterns of Participation and Response in an Online, Opt-in Survey PanelDaniel J. Hopkins19
2023Living in the Shadow of Deportation: How Immigration Enforcement Forestalls Political AssimilationMarcel F. Roman13
2024Decider in Chief? Why and How the Public Exaggerates the Power of the PresidencyBrendan Nyhan6
2024Racial Attitudes and Views of DisasterTali Mendelberg3
2025Political Knowledge in the Context of Changing and Informal InstitutionsRebecca Weitz-Shapiro1
2022Contested Identity and Prejudice Against Co-ethnic Refugees: Evidence from South Korea.Taeku Lee

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 18 of these 19 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.