What makes articles highly cited?

John Antonakis, Nicolas Bastardoz, Yonghong Liu, Chester Schriesheim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We examined drivers of article citations using 776 articles that were published from 1990 to 2012 in a broad-based and high-impact social sciences journal, The Leadership Quarterly. These articles had 1191 unique authors having published and received in total (at the time of their most recent article published in our dataset) 16,817 articles and 284,777 citations, respectively. Our models explained 66.6% of the variance in citations and showed that quantitative, review, method, and theory articles were significantly more cited than were qualitative articles or agent-based simulations. As concerns quantitative articles, which constituted the majority of the sample, our model explained 80.3% of the variance in citations; some methods (e.g., use of SEM) and designs (e.g., meta-analysis), as well as theoretical approaches (e.g., use of transformational, charismatic, or visionary type-leadership theories) predicted higher article citations. Regarding statistical conclusion validity of quantitative articles, articles having endogeneity threats received significantly fewer citations than did those using a more robust design or an estimation procedure that ensured correct causal estimation. We make several general recommendations on how to improve research practice and article citations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)152-179
Number of pages28
JournalLeadership Quarterly
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2014

Fingerprint

leadership
estimation procedure
research practice
Social Sciences
social science
driver
threat
simulation
Meta-Analysis
Research
Citations
time
Datasets

Keywords

  • Citations
  • Qualitative research
  • Quantitative research
  • Research impact
  • Research methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Applied Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

What makes articles highly cited? / Antonakis, John; Bastardoz, Nicolas; Liu, Yonghong; Schriesheim, Chester.

In: Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 1, 02.2014, p. 152-179.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Antonakis, J, Bastardoz, N, Liu, Y & Schriesheim, C 2014, 'What makes articles highly cited?', Leadership Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 152-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.014
Antonakis, John ; Bastardoz, Nicolas ; Liu, Yonghong ; Schriesheim, Chester. / What makes articles highly cited?. In: Leadership Quarterly. 2014 ; Vol. 25, No. 1. pp. 152-179.
@article{fe7a8dc2701d4ec1a1af9418eb16b437,
title = "What makes articles highly cited?",
abstract = "We examined drivers of article citations using 776 articles that were published from 1990 to 2012 in a broad-based and high-impact social sciences journal, The Leadership Quarterly. These articles had 1191 unique authors having published and received in total (at the time of their most recent article published in our dataset) 16,817 articles and 284,777 citations, respectively. Our models explained 66.6{\%} of the variance in citations and showed that quantitative, review, method, and theory articles were significantly more cited than were qualitative articles or agent-based simulations. As concerns quantitative articles, which constituted the majority of the sample, our model explained 80.3{\%} of the variance in citations; some methods (e.g., use of SEM) and designs (e.g., meta-analysis), as well as theoretical approaches (e.g., use of transformational, charismatic, or visionary type-leadership theories) predicted higher article citations. Regarding statistical conclusion validity of quantitative articles, articles having endogeneity threats received significantly fewer citations than did those using a more robust design or an estimation procedure that ensured correct causal estimation. We make several general recommendations on how to improve research practice and article citations.",
keywords = "Citations, Qualitative research, Quantitative research, Research impact, Research methods",
author = "John Antonakis and Nicolas Bastardoz and Yonghong Liu and Chester Schriesheim",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "152--179",
journal = "Leadership Quarterly",
issn = "1048-9843",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What makes articles highly cited?

AU - Antonakis, John

AU - Bastardoz, Nicolas

AU - Liu, Yonghong

AU - Schriesheim, Chester

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - We examined drivers of article citations using 776 articles that were published from 1990 to 2012 in a broad-based and high-impact social sciences journal, The Leadership Quarterly. These articles had 1191 unique authors having published and received in total (at the time of their most recent article published in our dataset) 16,817 articles and 284,777 citations, respectively. Our models explained 66.6% of the variance in citations and showed that quantitative, review, method, and theory articles were significantly more cited than were qualitative articles or agent-based simulations. As concerns quantitative articles, which constituted the majority of the sample, our model explained 80.3% of the variance in citations; some methods (e.g., use of SEM) and designs (e.g., meta-analysis), as well as theoretical approaches (e.g., use of transformational, charismatic, or visionary type-leadership theories) predicted higher article citations. Regarding statistical conclusion validity of quantitative articles, articles having endogeneity threats received significantly fewer citations than did those using a more robust design or an estimation procedure that ensured correct causal estimation. We make several general recommendations on how to improve research practice and article citations.

AB - We examined drivers of article citations using 776 articles that were published from 1990 to 2012 in a broad-based and high-impact social sciences journal, The Leadership Quarterly. These articles had 1191 unique authors having published and received in total (at the time of their most recent article published in our dataset) 16,817 articles and 284,777 citations, respectively. Our models explained 66.6% of the variance in citations and showed that quantitative, review, method, and theory articles were significantly more cited than were qualitative articles or agent-based simulations. As concerns quantitative articles, which constituted the majority of the sample, our model explained 80.3% of the variance in citations; some methods (e.g., use of SEM) and designs (e.g., meta-analysis), as well as theoretical approaches (e.g., use of transformational, charismatic, or visionary type-leadership theories) predicted higher article citations. Regarding statistical conclusion validity of quantitative articles, articles having endogeneity threats received significantly fewer citations than did those using a more robust design or an estimation procedure that ensured correct causal estimation. We make several general recommendations on how to improve research practice and article citations.

KW - Citations

KW - Qualitative research

KW - Quantitative research

KW - Research impact

KW - Research methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892545584&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892545584&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.014

DO - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.014

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84892545584

VL - 25

SP - 152

EP - 179

JO - Leadership Quarterly

JF - Leadership Quarterly

SN - 1048-9843

IS - 1

ER -