Re-Ranking the Top Female Academic Stars in Criminology and Criminal Justice Using an Alternative Method: A Research Note

Transcription

1 Re-Ranking the Top Female Academic Stars in Criminology and Criminal Justice Using an Alternative Method: A Research Note David N. Khey, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Criminal Justice Loyola University New Orleans New Orleans, LA dkhey@loyno.edu Wesley G. Jennings, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Justice Administration University of Louisville Brigman Hall, Room 215 Louisville, Kentucky wgjenn01@louisville.edu George E. Higgins, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Justice Administration University of Louisville Brigman Hall Louisville, Kentucky george.higgins@louisville.edu Andrea Schoepfer, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Criminal Justice California State University San Bernandino San Bernardino, CA aschoepf@csusb.edu Lynn Langton, M.A. Doctoral Candidate Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law University of Florida Gainesville, FL llangton@ufl.edu 1

2 Re-Ranking the Top Female Academic Stars in Criminology and Criminal Justice using an Alternative Method: A Research Note Abstract This study sought to re-rank the top female academic stars in criminology and criminal justice that were identified by Rice et al. (2007). Using a new software program called Harzing Publish or Perish, the results identified Robin S. Engel as the top ranked female star based on her total number of citations and her overall h-index. Nicole L. Piquero, Angela R. Gover, and Jean M. McGloin also were consistently ranked in the top 5 across a host of indexes that adjust for age of publication, number of co-authors, and highly cited works. Furthermore, the results were largely similar to Rice et al. s (2007), although some scholars did move up in the rankings using the new method employed in this study, particularly Angela R. Gover and Lois Presser. Study limitations and directions for future research are also discussed. 2

3 In 2007, Rice and his colleagues contributed an article to a special issue of Journal of Criminal Justice Education on Scholarly Influence in Criminal Justice which concentrated on the academic productivity of female scholars in criminology and criminal justice (Rice, Terry, Ventura-Miller, & Akerman, 2007). They clearly conveyed to the readership that the timeliness of this article was tied to the movement away from a White male dominated discipline to one that may soon hold a majority of female professors. Their research provided evidence to sustain the claim that influential criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) literature will have a more markedly feminine quality (2007: 379). The vast majority of their sample of 88 female doctorates that graduated between 1996 and percent were gainfully employed at Carnegie research universities. This research, in conjunction with Frost, Phillips, and Clear (2007) who verified that doctoral students in the new millennium were of a female majority, gives some credence to the claims that the good ol boy White male regime is subsiding. To what extent this is still occurring is an open inquiry that will continue for many years. However, it is certain that female CCJ academics are proliferating and their influence will continue to grow. Rice et al. s (2007) research also reproduced key findings of an earlier exploration into the research productivity of academic stars, or the smaller subset of scholars responsible for a vast majority of publications within the discipline. In this earlier work, Rice, Cohn, and Farrington (2005; see also Jennings, Schreck, Sturtz, & Mahoney, 2008; Shutt & Barnes, 2008) noted substantial variability in the levels of scholar productivity depending on the criteria utilized to measure this construct and on the characteristics of the university a scholar is employed (e.g., Research I or II). These tenets hold true for their sample of female stars as well. The work of Rice and his colleagues stand out among the large number of citation analysis 3

4 studies which spans back to the late 1970s (see Jennings, Higgins, & Khey, 2009) in that they introduced the assessment of faculty cohort influence and began an expansion in the sophistication of the methodology employed to assess scholarly influence and productivity. For example, the work of Jennings and his colleagues utilized nonparametric group-based trajectory modeling to identify distinguishing factors of a high output of scholarly work (Jennings, Gibson, Ward, & Beaver 2008). Jennings et al. also provided an extensive review of the literature investigating scholarly productivity among the criminology and criminal justice scholars through Until recently, the Thompson ISI Web of Knowledge citation index has dominated the evaluations of the influence a scholar has on his or her field. However, the work of Anne-Wil Harzing (2010) has challenged the proprietary, for-profit service by harnessing the massive amount of data scanned by Google s crawlers, that is, the robot computers which execute sophisticated algorithms to troll the Internet for new and updated data. Specifically, Harzing leverages the Google Scholar project in a citation analysis program of her design called Publish or Perish. Google Scholar is a search engine that utilizes a highly-guarded algorithmic procedure to identify scholarly works and index them accordingly. These works include articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites (Google, 2010). While a constant critique of Google s services, including Scholar, is the length of time each service remains in Beta form, academics employing Google Scholar for citation analysis (e.g., Bosman, van Mourik, Rasch, Sieverts, and Verhoeff, 2006; Meho & Yang, 2007) find substantial increases in citation coverage for the social sciences in particular. Particular caution should be made, however, in that the coverage for Google Scholar has been found to be vastly 4

5 subsidiary to the ISI citation index for articles published before 1990 (Pauly & Stergiou, 2005). While these previous studies fall out of date quickly as Google s crawlers identify terabytes of data on a daily basis, one should still exercise caution until further exploration into the coverage of Scholar versus other indexing services like ISI Web of Knowledge surface. For the CCJ scholars who received their degrees from 1990 on, utilizing a Google Scholar citation analysis technique like Professor Harzing s Publish or Perish may prove beneficial for measuring the breadth of a scholar s impact on the discipline. The Current Study Rice et al. (2007) utilized publication counts to assess their female cohort of academic stars. Although Rice et al. did incorporate various weighting and/or standardization procedures for adjusting their rankings the research still had its limitations. Specifically, the rankings were based solely on the number of publications from a select list of scholarly journals. Therefore, the entire body of work for each female scholar was not considered when determining the rankings. Acknowledging this limitation, the current study re-assesses the rankings of Rice et al. s female cohort of academic stars utilizing a new software program called Harzing Publish or Perish. Methodology Sample As mentioned previously, the sample from this study is the list of female academic stars identified by Rice et al. (2007). The full names of these 19 female academic stars, the year in which they were awarded their Ph.D., and the names of the universities where they are currently employed is provided in Table

6 Insert Table 1 about here Harzing Publish or Perish Harzing Publish or Perish is a new software program that uses Internet-based citation analyzing techniques to identify publications and citations via Google Scholar. Relying on Google Scholar to identify the publications and citations allows for the inclusion of the author s entire body of published work rather than just basing their publication productivity on a select list of peer-reviewed journals (Harzing, 2008). Furthermore, prior studies have demonstrated that Publish or Perish identifies nearly twice the number of publications and citations than those found through the Web of Science and Scopus (Harzing, 2008). This is largely the result of Publish or Perish having access to doctoral dissertations, master s theses, books, book chapters, and conference papers. The Harzing Publish or Perish software produces a number of basic descriptive statistics for each author such as: total number of papers, total number of citations, years since first publication, average number of citations per year, total citations per paper, total citations per author, and total papers per author. In addition, although the h-index is the most widely reported and comprehensive metric for determining an author s publication productivity (Harzing, 2008), the software also calculates nine additional indexes that can be used to adjust the author s rankings. For example: the e-index adjusts for dissimilar citation arrangements; the g-index gives more weight to highly cited articles; the hc-index gives more weight to recent publications; the hi-index adjusts the h-index for multiple authorship; the hi-norm-index adjusts the citation totals for multiple authorship; the hm-index accounts for multiple authorship first before 6

7 calculating the h-index; the AWCR-index adjusts for the age of the publications; the AW-index takes the square root of the AWCR-index in order to make it more comparable to the h-index; and the AWCRpA-index adjusts the AWCR-index for multiple authorship (for a more in depth discussion of the various indexes, see Long & Jennings, 2011). Results Table 2 provides the basic descriptive statistics for each of the 19 female academic stars identified by Rice et al. (2007). As can be seen, Robin S. Engel ranks number 1 based on total number of citations (528 citations total). Nicole L. Piquero and Angela R. Gover rank second and third with 428 and 330 total citations respectively. A. Gover is followed closely by Jean M. McGloin and Leanne Alarid. Laura J. Hickman, Lois J. Presser, Leah E. Daigle, Kristy Holtfreter, and Janet L. Mullings round out the top 10 female academic stars ranked by total number of citations. Once re-ranked according to the average number of citations per year, R.S Engel, J.M. McGloin, and N.L. Piquero ranked first, second, and third respectively. R.S. Engel also ranks number 1 after dividing the total number of citations by the number of publications and the number of co-authors. L. Alarid ranks first after adjusting the total number of publications for multiple authorship followed by L. Presser, J.M McGloin, N.L. Piquero, and R.S. Engel in that specific order. Finally, L. Presser ranks number one for averaging the least number of authors per publication (1.79) followed by Marie L. Griffin (1.81) and Elaine Gunnison (1.93) at second and third respectively. J.M. McGloin and L. Alarid are tied at fourth place with an average of 2.17 authors per paper. Insert Table 2 about here 7

8 Table 3 provides the rankings for the female academic stars based on their overall h- index and the various additional indexes calculated by the Publish or Perish software. What is readily apparent is that R.S. Engel who ranked number 1 according to total citations also ranks number 1 based on her overall h-index. A.R. Gover and N.L. Piquero follow closely behind at second and third respectively. J.M. McGloin and L.J. Hickman round out the top 5, and then there are a number of authors that are tied for sixth place. R.S. Engel also has the largest e-index (which adjusts for authors that have similar h-indexes but dissimilar citation patterns) followed by N.L. Piquero, L. Alarid, L.J. Hickman, and J.M. McGloin. Once the authors highly cited publications are given more weight (e.g., the g-index), R.S. Engel still remains number 1 and N.L. Piquero still remains number 2, but A.R. Gover, J.M. McGloin, L.J. Hickman, and L. Alarid all tie for third place. The hc-index (which gives more weight to newly published works) was the first index where another author shared the number 1 spot with R.S. Engel. Both A.R. Gover and R.S. Engel had an hc-index of 9. Four authors tied for third place (N.L. Piquero, J.M., McGloin, L.E. Daigle, and K. Holtfreter). Following an adjustment for the average number of authors per publication (e.g., the hi-index), K. Holtfreter occupies the number 1 ranking, and for the first time (using these adjusted indexes) R.S. Engel slips into the second place ranking. M.L. Griffin, L. Presser, and S.J. Listwan are third, fourth, and fifth respectively. According to the hi-norm-index (which adjusts the total citations by the number of authors), R.S. Engel is clearly ranked number one, and is the only author with a hinorm-index above 10. Following R.S. Engel, A.R. Gover, N.L. Piquero, L.J. Hickman, L. Presser, and M.L. Griffin are all tied for second place. Comparatively, R.S. Engel, N.L. Piquero, A.R. Gover, L. Presser, and J.M. McGloin ranked first, second, third, fourth, and fifth respectively after adjusting their total number of publications by the number of authors. 8

9 Finally, the last three indexes produced using the Publish or Perish software are the AWCR-index, the AW-index, and the AWCRpA-index. Following an adjustment for the age of the publications (AWCR-index), its square root variant (AW-index), and the age of the publications accounting for the number of authors, R.S. Engel still maintains the number 1 rank across all three of these indexes. N.L. Piquero ranked number 2 in two out of three of these indexes. J.M. McGloin ranked number 3 in two out of three of these indexes and number 2 based on her AWCRpA-index. Finally, L.E. Daigle ranked number 4 based on her AWCR-index and her AW-index, and A.R. Gover ranked number 5 across all three of these indexes. Insert Table 3 about here Once the rankings from this current study were compared to the various rankings produced via Rice et al. s ranking criteria, there were some interesting similarities and differences. First, R.S. Engel fluctuated from first to sixth place in Rice et al. s study, whereas she was the clear number 1 author in this study. She had the largest overall h-index and she had the greatest number of total citations. N.L. Piquero was ranked first to fifth place in Rice et al. s study, and she consistently occupied the second and third rank according to the results from the Publish or Perish program. One noticeable disparity in the rankings between the two studies was A.R. Gover. She ranked as high as fourth and as low as twelfth in Rice et al. s study, however, she clearly for the most part occupied the second or third spot in this study. Thus, this is likely an indication that although she may not have published as many articles in Rice et al. s condensed list of peer-reviewed journals as the other authors, she does have a large number of publications overall and her work is cited frequently. This same explanation also applies to L. 9

10 Presser s ranking disparity as well between Rice et al. s study and the current study. In addition, if you take a close look at the curriculum vitas of these two authors, they both appear to be specialists with A.R. Gover concentrating on corrections and domestic violence and L. Presser focusing on restorative justice issues. As such, there are obvious journal outlets that they have pursued that were not included in Rice et al. s original list (e.g., Violence Against Women, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, Sociological Inquiry). Insert Table 4 about here Discussion This study sought to re-evaluate the rankings of the top female stars in criminology and criminal justice that were identified by Rice et al. (2007). However, Rice et al. (2007: ) noted that one of the limitations of their study was that they do not account for books, book chapters, monographs, encyclopedia entries, and some specialized newer outlets. Thus, we utilized a new software program referred to as Harzing Publish or Perish to re-assess the rankings of the female stars. This new software program allows for both a citation and publication analysis of the entire breadth of an author s publications because it identifies their citations and publications via Google Scholar. Furthermore, this software program includes a host of informative indexes that adjust for age of the publication, number of co-authors, highly cited works, etc. The results of this analysis produced a series of key findings that we will highlight below. R.S. Engel was clearly shown to have the greatest total number of citations, total number of citations per year, and total number of citations per publication. Furthermore, N.L. Piquero, 10

11 A.R. Gover, J.M. McGloin, and K. Holtfreter were all (for the most part) consistently in the top 5 for each of these categories. Similarly, R.S. Engel also had the largest overall h-index, and A.R. Gover and N.L. Piquero were the only two other authors to have an overall h-index of 10 or greater. Furthermore, R.S. Engel, A.R. Gover, N.L. Piquero, and J.M. McGloin largely maintained their top five ranking regardless of which index was used in order to rank these female stars, e.g., h-index, e-index, g-index, hc-index, hi-index, hi-norm-index, hm-index, AWCR-index, AW-index, or AWCRpA-index. Once these main rankings for the current study (overall h-index and total number of citations) were compared with those of Rice et al. (2007) several interesting comparisons were observed. Overall, the rankings were by and large comparable to those of Rice et al. s. However, R.S. Engel visibly occupied the number 1 ranking in this study, whereas she fluctuated from number 1 to number 6 in Rice et al. s study. J.M. McGloin s ranking showed the largest degree of consistency across the two studies regardless of how the ranking was adjusted. N.L. Piquero s ranking was consistently higher and more stable in this particular study, and A.R. Gover and L. Presser ranked considerably higher in this study than they did in Rice et al. s study. A number of the other authors also moved up in the rankings in our study. As mentioned previously, Rice et al. s rankings were only based on the author s total number of publications in either a select list of 22 peer-reviewed academic journals and/or a select list of nine elite peerreviewed academic journals. Thus, it appears that by restricting the list of journal outlets, restricting the publications that are counted to only peer-reviewed academic journals, and by not accounting for whether or not the author s work is actually read and cited penalizes some scholars. This appears to be even more an issue for scholars who are specialized. As such, focusing on a select list may in fact lead to an underestimate of an author s overall impact on the 11

12 field of criminology and criminal justice. Nevertheless, there are certainly debates regarding what should and should not be counted and what bibliographic methodologies are more appropriate (see Marenin, 1993). A few study limitations are worth noting. First, Google Scholar (like most programs) can be affected by typographical errors. For instance, if an author s name or journal title is misspelled then their citation or publication may be considered as another publication or citation or perhaps not considered at all if the misspelling is severe. Having said this, the Publish or Perish software and its related indexes have been demonstrated to be fairly resistant to minor and infrequent errors in citations and publications (Harzing, 2008). In addition, the software allows the user to manually search through each citation and publication and click on its link in Google Scholar in order to determine its accuracy and/or relevance. Finally, the software does have some difficulty identifying older citations and publications (pre-1989) because a number of the citations and publications have not been added to the Internet (Harzing, 2008). Yet, there are a number of journals (particularly the more elite and widely read journals) that do have all of their articles no matter how old published on the Internet. Furthermore, all of the female scholars in this study received their Ph.D. post-1989, so this issue does not have a direct effect on the results presented here. In the end, this study sought to provide the first application of a new software program to re-evaluate the rankings of the top female academic stars in criminology and criminal justice that were first identified by Rice et al. (2007). The results suggest that both bibliographic methods yield relatively similar rankings, yet there were some authors that moved up in the rankings once the more comprehensive Publish or Perish method was applied. Nevertheless, there can be little debate that all of the female scholars included in Rice et al. s study and 12

13 subsequently our study are indeed academic stars in criminology and criminal justice. It is important for future research to continue tracking this cohort into the future as they are likely to continue to move further up the ranks in the discipline and solidify their position as international criminology and criminal justice stars. Ultimately, we hope that this research has provided an initial demonstration of how to apply a new methodology to assess scholarly productivity, and we encourage future research to use this method to rank different cohorts of scholars in general and different female cohorts specifically, as well as ranking other important sub-groups of criminology and criminal justice scholars (e.g., Whites, African-Americans, Hispanics). 13

14 References Bosman, J., Mourik, I. van, Rasch, M., Sieverts, E., & Verhoeff, H. (2006). Scopus reviewed and compared. The coverage and functionality of the citation database Scopus, including comparisons with Web of Science and Google Scholar. Utrecht: Utrecht University Library /Scopus doorgelicht & vergeleken - translated.pdf. Frost, N.A., Phillips, N.D., & Clear, T.R. (2007). Productivity of criminal justice scholars across the career. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 18, Harzing, A.W. (2010). Harzing.com: Research in international management products & services for academics. Harzing, A.W. (2008) Publish or Perish, version (20). Jennings, W.G., Gibson, C.L., Ward, J.T., & Beaver, K.M. (2008). Which group are you in? A preliminary investigation of group-based publication trajectories of criminology and criminal justice scholars. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, Jennings, W.G., Schreck, C.J., Sturtz, M., & Mahoney, M. (2008). Exploring the scholarly output of academic organization leadership in criminology and criminal justice: A research note on publication productivity. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, Jennings, W.G., Higgins, G.E., & Khey, D.N. (2009). Exploring the stability and variability of impact factors and associated rankings in criminology and criminal justice journals, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 20, Long, H., & Jennings, W.G. (In this special issue, 2011). Re-assessing publication productivity among academic stars in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education. Marenin, O. (1993). Faculty productivity in criminal justice PhD programs: Another view. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 4, Meho, L.I., & Yang, K. (2007). A new era in citation and bibliometric analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, Pauly, D., & Stergiou, K.I. (2005). Equivalence of results from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI s Citation Index and Google Scholar s service. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, December,

15 Rice, S.K., Cohn, E.G., & Farrington, D.P. (2005). Where are they now? Career trajectories of publication stars from American criminology and criminal justice programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16, Rice, S.K., Terry, K.J., Miller, H.V., & Ackerman, A.R. (2007). Research Trajectories of Female Scholars in Criminology and Criminal Justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 18, Shutt, J.E. & Barnes, J.C. (2008). Reexamining criminal justice star power in a larger sky: A belated response to Rice et al. on sociological influence in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19,

16 Table 1. Top Female Academic Stars Author Name Year of Ph.D. Graduation Current Employment (March 2010) Alarid, Leanne 1996 University of Texas-San Antonio Armstrong, Gaylene S Sam Houston State University Bouffard, Leana A Sam Houston State University Daigle, Leah E Georgia State University Doherty, Elaine E John Hopkins School of Public Health Engel, Robin S University of Cincinnati Gover, Angela R University of Denver Colorado Griffin, Marie L Arizona State University Gunnison, Elaine 2001 Seattle University Hickman, Laura J RAND Holtfreter, Kristy 2004 Florida State University Huebner, Beth M University of Missouri-St. Louis Koons-Witt, Barbara A University of South Carolina Listwan, Shelley J Kent State University McGloin, Jean M University of Maryland Mullings, Janet L Sam Houston State University Piquero, Nicole L Florida State University Presser, Lois 2002 University of Tennessee Stenius, Vanja 2005 University of Sterling 16

17 Table 2. Top Female Academic Stars : Ranked by Total Number of Citations Author Name Cites Cites/Year Cites/Paper Cites/Author Papers/Author Authors/Paper Engel, R.S. 553 (1) (1) (1) (1) (5) 2.46 (8) Piquero, N.L. 428 (2) (3) 9.30 (5) (2) (4) 2.54 (11) Gover, A.R. 330 (3) (9) 8.68 (10) (5) (6) 2.95 (14) McGloin, J.M. 328 (4) (2) 9.11 (6) (4) (3) 2.17 (4) Alarid, L. 314 (5) (10) 7.66 (13) (6) (1) 2.17 (4) Hickman, L.J. 294 (6) (8) 9.80 (4) (8) (9) 3.17 (17) Presser, L. 267 (7) (12) 7.85 (11) (3) (2) 1.79 (1) Daigle, L.E. 243 (8) (4) 7.84 (12) (13) (10) 3.29 (18) Holtfreter, K. 209 (9) (5) 9.95 (2) (10) (12) 2.38 (6) Mullings, J.L. 201 (10) (14) 6.28 (15) (12) (8) 3.13 (16) Griffin, M.L. 190 (11) (13) 9.05 (7) (7) (7) 1.81 (2) Huebner, B.M. 188 (12) (6) 8.95 (8) (9) (13) 2.48 (10) Armstrong, G.S. 178 (13) (11) 8.90 (9) (11) 8.92 (14) 2.65 (13) Bouffard, L.A. 149 (14) (7) 9.93 (3) (14) 7.33 (16) 2.40 (7) Listwan, S.J. 128 (15) 8.53 (16) 4.41 (18) (17) (11) 3.31 (19) Koons-Witt, B.A. 89 (16) 9.89 (15) 6.85 (14) (15) 6.25 (17) 2.54 (11) Gunnison, E. 78 (17) 6.50 (18) 5.20 (17) (16) 8.00 (15) 1.93 (3) Stenius, V. 69 (18) 8.63 (16) 5.31 (16) (18) 4.75 (18) 3.00 (15) Doherty, E.E. 27 (19) 4.50 (19) 3.38 (19) (19) 3.70 (19) 2.46 (8) 17

18 Table 3. Top Female Academic Stars : Ranked by Overall H-index Author Name H-index E-index G-index HC-index HI-index HI-Norm HM-index AWCR AW-index AWCRpA Engel, R.S. 13 (1) (1) 23 (1) 9 (1) 6.76 (2) 12 (1) 9.42 (1) (1) 8.70 (1) (1) Gover, A.R. 11 (2) (8) 17 (3) 9 (1) 3.78 (7) 7 (2) 6.67 (3) (5) 6.75 (5) (5) Piquero, N.L 10 (3) (2) 19 (2) 8 (3) 3.85 (6) 7 (2) 7.00 (2) (2) 7.85 (2) (3) McGloin, J.M. 9 (4) (5) 17 (3) 8 (3) 3.38 (8) 6 (7) 6.08 (5) (3) 7.58 (3) (2) Hickman, L.J. 9 (4) (4) 17 (3) 7 (7) 3.12 (10) 7 (2) 3.75 (12) (7) 5.92 (7) (10) Presser, L. 8 (6) (6) 16 (7) 6 (10) 4.27 (4) 7 (2) 6.33 (4) (9) 5.66 (9) (4) Daigle, L.E. 8 (6) (7) 15 (8) 8 (3) 2.06 (15) 4 (12) 3.32 (14) (4) 6.77 (4) (11) Holtfreter, K. 8 (6) (9) 14 (9) 8 (3) 8.00 (1) 6 (7) 4.42 (10) (6) 6.41 (6) (7) Mullings, J.L. 8 (6) 9.80 (13) 13 (10) 6 (10) 2.37 (14) 4 (12) 3.92 (11) (14) 4.76 (13) 7.34 (15) Griffin, M.L. 8 (6) 9.80 (13) 13 (10) 7 (7) 4.57 (3) 7 (2) 5.33 (6) (11) 5.36 (11) (6) Huebner, B. 8 (6) 9.95 (10) 13 (10) 7 (7) 3.37 (9) 6 (7) 5.25 (7) (8) 5.80 (8) (8) Alarid, L. 7 (12) (3) 17 (3) 5 (13) 2.58 (12) 5 (10) 4.57 (9) (10) 5.42 (10) (9) Armstrong, G.S. 7 (12) 9.95 (10) 13 (10) 6 (10) 2.72 (11) 5 (10) 4.67 (8) (13) 4.76 (13) (14) Bouffard, L.A. 6 (14) 9.90 (12) 12 (14) 4 (14) 2.40 (13) 4 (12) 3.42 (13) (12) 5.16 (12) (13) Listwan, S.J. 5 (15) 8.12 (15) 10 (10) 4 (14) 4.00 (5) 3 (15) 2.95 (15) (15) 4.57 (15) 5.89 (16) Stenius, V. 5 (15) 6.08 (18) 8 (18) 4 (14) 1.79 (16) 3 (15) 2.17 (17) (17) 3.37 (17) 4.36 (17) Koons-Witt, B.A. 4 (17) 7.87 (17) 9 (16) 3 (18) 1.60 (17) 3 (15) 2.42 (16) (16) 3.97 (16) (12) Doherty, E.E. 4 (17) 2.45 (19) 5 (19) 4 (14) 1.45 (19) 2 (19) 2.12 (18) 5.93 (19) 2.44 (19) 3.16 (19) Gunnison, E. 3 (19) 8.00 (16) 8 (17) 2 (19) 1.50 (18) 3 (15) 2.00 (19) 7.64 (18) 2.70 (18) 3.87 (18) 18

19 Table 4. Ranking Comparisons to Rice et al. (2007) Author Name Current Study (2010) H-index Current Study (2010) Total Citations Rice et al. (2007) Total Publications* Rice et al. (2007) Total Publications (standardized)** Rice et al. (2007) Total Elite Publications*** Rice et al. (2007) Total Elite Publications (standardized)**** Engel, R.S Gover, A.R Piquero, N.L McGloin, J.M Hickman, L.J Presser, L Daigle, L.E Holtfreter, K Mullings, J.L Griffin, M.L Huebner, B.M Alarid, L Armstrong, G.S Bouffard, L.A Listwan, S.J Stenius, V Koons-Witt, B.A Doherty, E.E Gunnison, E *The total number of publications in the following 22 academic journals: Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, British Journal of Criminology, Canadian Journal of Criminology, Crime and Delinquency, Criminal Justice and Behavior, Criminal Justice Review, Criminology, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Journal of Crime and Justice, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Justice Quarterly, Law and Society Review, Social Justice, Women and Criminal Justice. **The total number of publications in the 22 academic journals listed above divided by the total number of years in the discipline. ***The total number of publications in the following 9 elite academic journals: Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, British Journal of Criminology, Canadian Journal of Criminology, Criminology, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Justice Quarterly, and Law & Society Review. ****The total number of publications in the 9 elite academic journals listed above divided by the total number of years in the discipline. 19

20 Notes. 1 Jodi Lane was the only scholar from Rice et al. s (2007) list that was not able to re-ranked in the current study using the Harzing Publish or Perish software. The main reason why she was not included was a software limitation and a result of her having a common author name. For instance, there were numerous scholars with the name J. Lane and hundreds of scholars with the last name Lane. Furthermore, the Harzing Publish or Perish software defaults to only include the first 1,000 citations/publications found, so the extent of how many more citations exist to sort through over 1,000 is unknown. Even after limiting the time frame of publishing and excluding certain scholar names (e.g., E. Lane, S. Lane, etc.), the software was still unavailable to identify Jodi Lane s citations/publications with any degree of accuracy. 20