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

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

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’ median5,817.0 · 38%
B · citations per work156.1 · 70%
N · works93 · 78%
P · academics45 · 82%
Formula result0.851

From this institution

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

Works41
Citations1,861 over 38 of 41 works
Citations per counted work49.0
Weighted citations
Academics25
Departments7
First seen2022

Works placed per year

39 of these 41 works carry a year; an undated work is in no year. Works placed, under these filters.

Departments publishing there 7

DepartmentWorks
Dartmouth Government11
Harvard Government10
Columbia Political Science5
Cornell Government5
Penn Political Science5
Princeton Politics5
Yale Political Science4

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

Works placed there 41

YearTitleAcademicsCitations
2022Current research overstates American support for political violenceSean J. Westwood301
2022No reason to expect large and consistent effects of nudge interventionsAndrew Gelman208
2025The Potential Existential Threat of Large Language Models to Online Survey ResearchSean J. Westwood149
2024The Effects of Facebook and Instagram on the 2020 Election: A Deactivation ExperimentAndrew M. Guess · Brendan Nyhan133
2022COVID-19 Increased Censorship Circumvention and Access to Sensitive Topics in China.William R. Hobbs95
2022Online Engagement with 2020 Election Misinformation and Turnout in the 2021 Georgia Runoff Election.William R. Hobbs92
2022Measuring Dynamic Media BiasEunji Kim90
2024Uncommon and Nonpartisan: Anti-Democratic Attitudes In The American PublicSean J. Westwood82
2023Widespread Partisan Gerrymandering Mostly Cancels Nationally, but Reduces Electoral CompetitionKosuke Imai · Shiro Kuriwaki78
2022Time and Skeptical Opinion Content Erode the Effects of Science Coverage on Climate Beliefs and AttitudesBrendan Nyhan64
2022How local partisan context conditions prosocial behaviors: Mask wearing during COVID-19Ryan D. Enos64
2025Short-term exposure to filter-bubble recommendation systems has limited polarization effects: Naturalistic experiments on YouTubeAndrew M. Guess54
2025Does AI help humans make better decisions? A methodological framework for experimental evaluationKosuke Imai50
2023Hate crime supporters are found across age, gender, and income groups and are susceptible to violent political appeals.Rafaela Dancygier49
2025Does AI help humans make better decisions? A statistical evaluation framework for experimental and observational studiesKosuke Imai · Melody Huang48
2025Why Depolarization is Hard: Evaluating Attempts to Decrease Partisan Animosity in AmericaSean J. Westwood34
2023Estimating the value of democracy relative to other institutional and economic outcomes among citizens in Brazil, France, and the United StatesCarles Boix29
2025Listen for a Change? A Longitudinal Field Experiment on Listening’s Potential to Enhance PersuasionJoshua Kalla25
2023Generically partisan: Polarization in political communicationAndrew Gelman25
2024The July 2024 Trump Assassination Attempt was Followed by Lower In-Group Support for Partisan Violence and Increased Group UnitySean J. Westwood22
2022Reply to Kalmoe and Mason: The pitfalls of using surveys to measure low-prevalence attitudes and behaviorSean J. Westwood22
2024Inflation in 2022 Did Not Affect Congressional Voting, but Abortion Did,Edward D. Mansfield21
2024Political practitioners poorly predict which messages persuade the publicJoshua Kalla20
2023People are Less Myopic about Future than Past Collective OutcomesMarkus Prior · Talbot M. Andrews14
2025Chatbot Voting Advice Applications Inform But Seldom Sway Young Unaligned VotersDonald P. Green · Yamil Ricardo Velez14
2023For ’Living Well’, Behaviors and Circumstances Matter Just as Much as Psychological Traits.William R. Hobbs13
& Tipton, E.(2022). No reason to expect large and consistent effects of nudge interventionsAndrew Gelman10
2025Governing in the face of a global crisis: when do voters punish and reward incumbent governments?Peter John Loewen9
2026Reply to Van der Stigchel et al.: Empirical evidence that AI survey contamination is real and substantialSean J. Westwood8
2024A Summer Bridge Program for First-Generation Low-Income Students Stretches Academic Ambitions with No Adverse Impacts on GPAKosuke Imai8
2023Election Cycles and Global Religious IntoleranceGareth Nellis8
2024Peer conformity and competition shape how business managers evaluate withdrawals from Russia amid the Ukraine WarChristina L. Davis7
2025How publics in small-island states view climate change and international responses to itParrish Bergquist7
2026Why Biden-era clean energy investment policies had limited political returnsDustin Tingley4
2024Census officials must constructively engage with independent evaluationsKosuke Imai2
2026Systemic electioneering from the evangelical pulpit: Evidence from a computational analysisSean J. Westwood1
2025Estimating The Legibility of International Borders.Beth Simmons1
2026Public responses to atrocities depend on partisanship and context, not labelsSean J. Westwood0
2026Local partisan context and mental healthRyan D. Enos
2026Leveraging generative AI for causal inference with unstructured dataKosuke Imai
THE POLITICAL ECONOMISTDiana C. Mutz

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 38 of these 41 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.