Abstract
Citation analysis involves compiling the citations of the work of university faculties. It yields an objective and replicable estimate of scholarly productivity and a reliable measure of program reputation. In this study, a citation analysis was conducted for faculties at 81 doctoral-granting special education programs. Citations per faculty over 2 years averaged 7.23; the mode was 0. Rankings of programs based upon citations were closely related to rankings from a reputational survey and a publication count. Subsequently, an analysis was conducted using 37 programs ranked in the top 20 on at least one measure of program quality. Only nominations on a reputation survey proved to be closely related to citations. Stepwise multiple regression indicated that 68% of the variance in nominations could be explained by a combination of three measures. The high predictability of nominations suggests that they are less subjective than previously argued.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
