501 research outputs found
Understanding the Impact of Early Citers on Long-Term Scientific Impact
This paper explores an interesting new dimension to the challenging problem
of predicting long-term scientific impact (LTSI) usually measured by the number
of citations accumulated by a paper in the long-term. It is well known that
early citations (within 1-2 years after publication) acquired by a paper
positively affects its LTSI. However, there is no work that investigates if the
set of authors who bring in these early citations to a paper also affect its
LTSI. In this paper, we demonstrate for the first time, the impact of these
authors whom we call early citers (EC) on the LTSI of a paper. Note that this
study of the complex dynamics of EC introduces a brand new paradigm in citation
behavior analysis. Using a massive computer science bibliographic dataset we
identify two distinct categories of EC - we call those authors who have high
overall publication/citation count in the dataset as influential and the rest
of the authors as non-influential. We investigate three characteristic
properties of EC and present an extensive analysis of how each category
correlates with LTSI in terms of these properties. In contrast to popular
perception, we find that influential EC negatively affects LTSI possibly owing
to attention stealing. To motivate this, we present several representative
examples from the dataset. A closer inspection of the collaboration network
reveals that this stealing effect is more profound if an EC is nearer to the
authors of the paper being investigated. As an intuitive use case, we show that
incorporating EC properties in the state-of-the-art supervised citation
prediction models leads to high performance margins. At the closing, we present
an online portal to visualize EC statistics along with the prediction results
for a given query paper
Citing for High Impact
The question of citation behavior has always intrigued scientists from
various disciplines. While general citation patterns have been widely studied
in the literature we develop the notion of citation projection graphs by
investigating the citations among the publications that a given paper cites. We
investigate how patterns of citations vary between various scientific
disciplines and how such patterns reflect the scientific impact of the paper.
We find that idiosyncratic citation patterns are characteristic for low impact
papers; while narrow, discipline-focused citation patterns are common for
medium impact papers. Our results show that crossing-community, or bridging
citation patters are high risk and high reward since such patterns are
characteristic for both low and high impact papers. Last, we observe that
recently citation networks are trending toward more bridging and
interdisciplinary forms.Comment: 10 pages, 6 figures, 1 tabl
Standing the Test of Time: The Breadth of Majority Coalitions and the Fate of U.S. Supreme Court Precedents
Should a strategic Justice assemble a broader coalition for the majority opinion than is necessary, even if that means accommodating changes that move the opinion away from the author’s ideal holding? If the author’s objective is to durably move the law to his or her ideal holding, the conventional answer is no, because there is a cost and no corresponding benefit. We consider whether attracting a broad majority coalition can placate future courts. Controlling for the size of the coalition, we find that cases with ideologically narrow coalitions are more likely to be treated negatively by later courts. Specifically, adding either ideological breadth or a new member to the majority coalition results in an opinion that is less likely to be overruled, criticized, or questioned by a later court. Our findings contradict the conventional wisdom regarding the coalition-building strategy of a rational and strategic opinion author, establishing that the author has an incentive to go beyond the four most ideologically proximate Justices in building a majority coalition. And because of later interpreters’ negative reactions to narrow coalitions, the law ends up being less ideological than the Justices themselves
- …