Frequently published scholars and educational backgrounds

Most-Cited Scholars in Criminology and Criminal Justice, 1986-2010

“…This perspective has been developed into a subsidiary form of citation analysis, known as productivity analysis. Productivity analysis, which looks at the productivity of faculty members in terms of their number of publications, has been used in CCJ to evaluate CCJ departments (Cohn & Farrington, 1998c ;Cohn, Farrington, & Sorenson, 2000 ;Davis & Sorenson, 2010 ;DeZee, 1980 ;Fabianic, 1981Fabianic, , 2001Fabianic, , 2002Kleck & Barnes, 2011 ;Kleck, Wang, & Tark, 2007 ;Oliver, Swindell, Marks, & Balusek, 2009 ;Parker & Goldfeder, 1979 ;Sorenson, 1994 ;Sorenson et al, 1992 ;Sorenson & Pilgrim, 2002 ;Steiner & Schwartz, 2006Taggart & Holmes, 1991 ). It has also been used either in place of or in addition to citation analysis to study the scholarly infl uence of individual scholars in CCJ Fabianic, 2012 ;Frost, Phillips, & Clear, 2007 ;Jennings, Gibson, Ward, & Beaver, 2008 ;Jennings, Schreck, Sturtz, & Mahoney, 2008 ;Khey, Jennings, Higgins, Schoepfer, & Langton, 2011 ;Long, Boggess, & Jennings, 2011 ;Oliver et al, 2009 ;Orrick & Weir, 2011 ;Rice, Cohn, & Farrington, 2005 ;Rice, Terry, Miller, & Ackerman, 2007 ;Shutt & Barnes, 2008 ;Stack, 2001 ;Steiner & Schwartz, 2006.…”

Patterns and theories of European homicide research

“…This type of research is often based on citation indexes and yields lists showing the most cited scholars (Cohn and Farrington, 2007) or the most cited journals in the field (Sorensen, 2009). Another approach has been to study the institutional source of published peer-reviewed articles, an exercise that reveals the most productive institutions (Fabianic, 2001). Furthermore, analogous quantitative methods have been used to explore more substantial questions as well.…”

A Social Network Analysis of Publishing Networks in the “Big 5” Journals in Criminology and Criminal Justice

“…This genre of science has typically focused on a host of topics including efforts to identify academic "stars" in the discipline, ranking journals in the discipline, ranking departments/programs in the disciplines, and investigating other publication productivity metrics (i.e., number of co-authors, etc.) (Barranco et al, 2016;Cohn & Farrington, 1998;Copes et al, 2012;Fabianic, 2001Fabianic, , 2002Cohn & Farrington, 2007;Frost et al, 2007;Jennings et al, 2009;Jennings, Gibson, et al, 2008;Jennings, Schreck, et al, 2008;Khey et al, 2011;2017;Kleck et al, 2007;Kleck & Mims, 2017;Long et al, 2011;Parker & Goldfeder, 1979;Poole & Regoli, 1981;Rice et al,2005Rice et al, , 2007Shichor et al, 1981;Shutt & Barnes, 2008;Sorensen et al, 1992Sorensen et al, , 2006Sorensen & Pilgrim, 2002;Stack, 1987;Steiner & Schwartz, 2006). Importantly, these publication productivity metrics have also been explored for female scholars, minority scholars, and for programs beyond those that only house doctoral programs (Ahlin, 2020;del Carmen & Bing, 2000;Greene et al, 2018;Potter et al, 2011;Rice et al, 2007).…”