Productive entities and citation patterns of highly cited papers in public administration domain: An informetric profile

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the characteristics of highly cited public administration articles in the Social Science Citation Index published from 1900 to 2022. Results show that classic works were revealed to frequently occur in the 1970s, and most of articles are on collaborative governance research. The output of countries, institutions, authors, and journals in the field of public administration also was revealed. In addition, the study discovers the life cycle of highly cited articles, including three types: “delayed growth,” “steady growth,” and “rapid growth.” This study describes the citation behavior characteristics of academic entities in the discipline of public administration and the common rules of highly cited papers, which provides insights for the future development direction of the discipline of public administration research.

Keywords

Citation pattern highly cited articles informetric profile productive entities public administration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aksnes

D. W

. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12(3), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776645

Ansell

Gash

. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032

Behn

R. D

. (1995). The big questions of public management. Public Administration Review, 55(4), 313–324. https://doi.org/10.2307/977122

Bentler

P. M

. (1992). On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 400–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.400

Bornmann

Daniel

H.-D

. (2008). Selecting manuscripts for a high-impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of communications that were accepted byAngewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1841–1852. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20901

Chandra

Y. W.

Richard

. (2018). How does A seminal article in public administration diffuse and influence the field? Bibliometric methods and the case of Hood’s “A public management for all seasons?” International Public Management Journal, 22(5), 712–742. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2018.1498817

Chiu

W.-T.

Y.-S

. (2005). Bibliometric analysis of homeopathy research during the period of 1991 to 2003. Scientometrics, 63(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0201-7

Churchho

R. F

. (1968). Note on twenty-five most cited papers in some leading journals. Computer Journal, 11(1), 116–120.

Desmarais

B. A.

Hird

J. A

. (2014). Public policy’s bibliography: The use of research in US regulatory impact analyses. Regulation & Governance, 8(4), 497–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12041

10.

Emerson

Nabatchi

Balogh

. (2011). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011

11.

Favero

Bullock

J. B

. (2014). How (not) to solve the problem: An evaluation of scholarly responses to common source bias. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu020

12.

Fischhoff

Slovic

Lichtenstein

Read

Combs

. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9(2), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00143739

13.

Frederickson

H. G

. (1996). Comparing the reinventing government movement with the new public administration. Public Administration Review, 56(3), 263–270. https://doi.org/10.2307/976450

14.

H. Z.

Y. S

. (2013). Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980-2011. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 210–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.005

15.

H.-Z.

Y.-S

. (2016). Highly cited Antarctic articles using Science Citation Index Expanded: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 109(1), 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1992-4

16.

H. Z.

Wang

M. H.

Y. S

. (2012). The most frequently cited adsorption research articles in the Science Citation Index (Expanded). Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 379(1), 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2012.04.051

17.

Gaeta

T. J

. (1999). Authorship: “Law” and order. Academic Emergency Medicine, 6(4), 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00393.x

18.

Garfield

. (1955). Citation indexes for science: New dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122(3159), 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108

19.

Garfield

. (1974). Journal citation studies. 8. Some highly cited articles from highly cited general medical and clinical journals. Current Contents, 27, 5–12.

20.

Head

B. W.

Alford

. (2013). Wicked problems. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601

21.

Y.-S

. (2012). Top-cited articles in chemical engineering in science citation index expanded: A bibliometric analysis. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 20(3), 478–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1004-9541(11)60209-7

22.

Hood

(1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x

23.

Hsu

Y. H.

Y. S

. (2014). Highly cited articles in health care sciences and services field in Science Citation Index Expanded. A bibliometric analysis for 1958- 2012. Methods of Information in Medicine, 53(6), 446–458. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME14-01-0022

24.

Ivanović

Y.-S

. (2014). Highly cited articles in the Information Science and Library Science category in Social Science Citation Index: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000614537514

25.

Jensen

M. D.

Kristensen

P. M

. (2013). The elephant in the room: Mapping the latent communication pattern in European Union studies. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.699656

26.

Kasdin

Burt

Newcomer

. (2018). Getting performance from performance management: A framework for strategic management choices. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(15), 1228–1242. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1384489

27.

Kim

P. S

. (2012). A historical overview of Korean public administration: Discipline, education, association, international cooperation and beyond indigenization. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(2), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852312438043

28.

Lecy

J. D. M.

Schmitz

I. A.

Peter

. (2013). Networks in public administration: Current scholarship in review. Public Management Review, 16(5), 643–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.743577

29.

Levy

. (2015). Governance reform: Getting the fit right. Public Administration and Development, 35(4), 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1734

30.

Lyu

P. H.

Zhang

M. Z.

Liu

C. J.

Ngai

E. W. T

. (2022). Global scientific production, international cooperation, and knowledge evolution of public administration. Public Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12853

31.

McDonald

B. D.

Hall

J. L.

O'Flynn

Thiel

. (2022). The future of public administration research: An editor’s perspective. Public Administration, 100(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12829

32.

McGuigan

G. S.

Morcol

Grosser

. (2021). Using ego-network analyses to examine journal citations: A comparative study of public administration, political science, and business management. Scientometrics, 126(12), 9345–9368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04189-2

33.

Mergel

Rethemeyer

R. K.

Isett

. (2016). Big data in public affairs. Public Administration Review, 76(6), 928–937. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12625

34.

H.-Z.

Y.-S

. (2018). Highly cited articles in wind tunnel-related research: A bibliometric analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(16), 15541–15553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1766-z

35.

Moynihan

D. P.

Pandey

S. K.

(2007). The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 67(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00695.x

36.

Muttaqin

M. Z

. (2022). Social value in public policy. Critical Policy Studies, 16(4), 510–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2064320

37.

Sugimoto

C. R.

Robbin

. (2017). Examining the evolution of the field of public administration through a bibliometric analysis of public administration review. Public Administration Review, 77(4), 496–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12737

38.

N. Y. U. Law Review Editorial Board. (2000). Seventy-fifth anniversary retrospective: Most influential articles. New York University Law Review, 75(6), 1517.

39.

Oppenheim

Renn

S. P

. (1978). Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(5), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630290504

40.

Pandey

S. K.

(2006). Connecting the dots in public management: Political environment, organizational goal ambiguity, and the public manager’s role ambiguity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(4), 511–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muj006

41.

Park

H.-S.

Lee

S.-J.

. (2011). Rankings, citation relationships, and the network structure of major Korean Public Administration Journals. Korean Journal of Public Administration, 49(4), 1–24.

42.

Perry

J. L.

Wise

L. R

. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50(3), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.2307/976618

43.

Provan

K. G.

Kenis

(2007). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015

44.

Raadschelders

J. C. N.

Lee

K.-H

. (2011). Trends in the study of public administration: Empirical and qualitative observations from public administration review, 2000-2009. Public Administration Review, 71(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02303.x

45.

Rittel

H. W. J.

Webber

M. M

. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01405730

46.

Rubalcaba

Peralta

. (2022). Value processes and lifecycles in networks for public service innovation. Public Management Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2039952

47.

Rutgers

M. R

. (2016). Paradigm lost: Crisis as identity of the study of public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 64(4), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/002085239806400402

48.

Sabatier

P. A

. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2–3), 129–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00136406

49.

Shambaugh

Matthew

Silver

R. C.

McDonald

Poulin

Blum

. (2009). Public perceptions of traumatic events and policy preferences during the George W. Bush administration: A Portrait of America in Turbulent Times. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 33(1), 55–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576100903488410

50.

Stern

R. S.

Arndt

K. A

. (1999). Top cited authors in dermatology: A citation study from 24 journals: 1982-1996. Archives of Dermatological Research, 135(3), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.135.3.299

51.

Tan

H.-Z.

Y.-S

. (2013). A bibliometric analysis of research on proteomics in Science Citation Index Expanded. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1473–1490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1125-2

52.

Tessa Picknett

K. D

. (1999). The 100 most-cited articles from JMB. Journal of Molecular Biology, 293(2), 171–174. https://doi.org/JournalofMolecularBiology

53.

Van de Walle

van Delft

. (2014). Publishing in public administration: Issues with defining, comparing, and ranking the output of universities. International Public Management Journal, 18(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2014.972482

54.

Vogel

. (2013). What happened to the public organization? A bibliometric analysis of public administration and organization studies. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4), 383–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012470867

55.

Vogel

Hattke

. (2022). A century of Public Administration: Traveling through time and topics. Public Administration, 100(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12831

56.

Watkins

C. E.

Jr. Bradford

B. D

. (1988). Significant contributors to and classic publications in Adlerian psychotherapy. Individual Psychology-The Journal of Adlerian Theory Research and Practice, 44(2), 144–149.

57.

Wright

B. E.

Moynihan

D. P.

Pandey

S. K.

(2012). Pulling the levers: Transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x

58.

Yıldız

. (2012). Big questions of e-government research. Information Polity, 17(3,4), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-2012-000284

59.

Usman

. (2022). Development of public administration research with a bibliometric analysis. Scientific Programming, 2022, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4959930

60.

Yuh-Shan

. (2004). Citation review of Lagergren kinetic rate equation on adsorption reactions. Scientometrics, 59(1), 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000013305.99473.cf

61.

Zhang

Zhao

Sun

Huang

Glanzel

. (2020). How scientific research reacts to international public health emergencies: A global analysis of response patterns. Scientometrics, 124(1), 747–773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03531-4

62.

Ziman

J. M

. (1968). An essay concerning the social dimension of science. Cambridge University Press.