High-Impact Social Work Scholars

Hodge, David R.; Kremer, Kristen P.; Vaughn, Michael G.

doi:10.1177/1049731516645929

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, this general measure has been used to examine faculty dissemination of impactful scholarship in Australia (Tilbury et al, 2022), Canada (Holosko et al, 2018), Hong Kong (Holosko, 2022), and the United States (Thyer et al, 2019). The Google Scholar h-index has also been used to identify the top Fellows affiliated with the Society for Social Work and Research and the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (Hodge et al, 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who are the Top 100 Contributors to Social Work Journal Scholarship? A Global Study on Career Impact in the Profession

Hodge

Turner

2022

Research on Social Work Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study identified the top 100 most impactful global contributors to social work journal scholarship. Methods: To conduct this descriptive study, we used a publicly available database of the world's leading scientists. After extracting all scholars in the social work category, we rank ordered them according to a composite measure of scholarly impact that controls for self-citations and author order. Results: All identified contributors to the profession's journals ranked highly relative to the larger global population of published scientists. Furthermore, 23 individuals were in the top 100,000 scientists globally. Scholars were based in seven different nations and most had solid social work credentials according to three measures: current affiliation in a social work program and Master of Social Work/doctoral degree status. Conclusions: The results reveal that social work is home to some of the world's leading scientists. Leveraging their skills and knowledge can help advance the profession's collective knowledge development and dissemination.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who are the Top 100 Contributors to Social Work Journal Scholarship? A Global Study on Career Impact in the Profession

Hodge

Turner

2022

Research on Social Work Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should also be noted many faculty who fell outside the parameters of our selection criteria are highly knowledgeable regarding scholarship dissemination. For instance, emeritus or tenure track faculty at programs that offer BSW/MSW degrees, but not PhD degrees, may fit into this category (Hodge et al, 2016). Likewise, fixed-term, as well as faculty on clinical tracks, may also be knowledgeable about disciplinary publication outlets (de Saxe Zerden et al, 2015).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ranking Disciplinary Social Work Journals: Comparing Faculty Perceptions With Two Citation-Based Approaches

Hodge¹,

Kim

2021

Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publishing in highly ranked disciplinary journals plays a critical role in career advancement. Yet, the process through which journals are classified as top-tier is largely unexamined in the social work literature. To better understand the utility of various methods for determining journal quality, we compare three basic approaches to ranking disciplinary journals: reputation, h-index values, and impact factors (IFs). More specifically, we compare faculty perceptions of social work journals in 2019 with faculty perceptions in 2000, Google Scholar h-index rankings from 2010, and Clarivate Analytics' IFs from 2008 and 2017. Method: To create a current, reputation-based ranking of disciplinarily periodicals, a national sample of tenure-track faculty (N 5 307) evaluated the overall quality and prestige of social work periodicals (N 5 64). We obtained prior faculty perceptions of quality and prestige from Sellers et al. (2004), h-index values from Hodge and Lacasse (2011), and 2008 and 2017 IFs from Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science portal. Results: Faculty perceptions of quality exhibited a relatively strong correlation with faculty perceptions in 2000 (r s 5 .76), suggesting that faculty perceptions regarding journal quality are relatively stable across decades. Among the citationbased approaches, the 2010 Google Scholar h-index values exhibited the strongest correlation with current faculty perceptions (r s 5 .81), and the 2017 IFs had the lowest correlation (r s 5 .48). Conclusions: The results provide some guidance to disciplinary stakeholders making assessments about top-tier journals. For instance, the relative stability of faculty perceptions enables scholars to have some confidence that journals that are currently perceived as top-tier will remain so in the future. Results also raise questions about the utility of relying upon IFs in assessments of journal quality.

show abstract

“…There have been no studies examining the extent to which social work PhD students are achieving the aspirational goals set forth by GADE, although there has been much recent research into the productivity of social work faculty (Hodge, Kremer, & Vaughn, 2016;Smith, Jacobs, Osteen, & Carter, 2018), often focusing on examining publication rates in relation to the reputation of schools (Barner et al, 2015;Feldman, 2006;Holosko & Barner, 2016). Most of the studies regarding increasing the quality in social work PhD education have been looking at the content of curriculum, such as Drisko, Hunnicutt, and Berenson's (2015) content analysis of PhD programs, or methods to increase scholarly output, such as Bender and Windsor's (2010) piece on demystifying the publication process or Grant and Tomal's (2015) guide for publishing and presenting for PhD students not studying in research universities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Examination of the Productivity of Social Work Doctoral Students

Lightfoot

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined social work doctoral student productivity related to the Group for Doctoral Education in Social Work's (GADE) aspirational goals regarding publication, author order, presentations, and teaching by examining doctoral student CVs of students graduating from PhD Programs in the top 39 Schools of Social Work in the United States. On average, students exceeded GADE's publication goals, with an average of 4.0 (median) peer-reviewed articles, and met its sole or first-authored article goal, with an average of 1.0 (median). Students far exceeded GADE’s aspirational presentation goal of two or three presentations, averaging 9.5 (median) presentations at peer-reviewed conferences. Finally, students exceeded GADE’s aspirational goal of teaching at least one independent section, averaging 2.0 (median) independent sections taught. There were no differences productivity based on the ranking of the school in which they were studying.

show abstract

High-Impact Social Work Scholars

Cited by 9 publications

References 51 publications

Who are the Top 100 Contributors to Social Work Journal Scholarship? A Global Study on Career Impact in the Profession

Who are the Top 100 Contributors to Social Work Journal Scholarship? A Global Study on Career Impact in the Profession

Ranking Disciplinary Social Work Journals: Comparing Faculty Perceptions With Two Citation-Based Approaches

An Examination of the Productivity of Social Work Doctoral Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About