Why do some academic articles receive more citations from policy communities?

Abstract

Abstract We (1) present the landscape of the citations of Public Administration and Policy (PAP) scholarly articles in policy documents and (2) examine influencing factors along three dimensions: collaborative teams, cross‐disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms. Using data from the 30 most‐cited PAP peer‐reviewed journals and 38,062 documents from 1107 policy institutions, we find that 10.1% of all PAP scholarship receives high citations from both academics and policy communities. Collaborative teams, cross‐disciplinary interactions, and disruptive paradigms can all increase the citations within policy communities, yet the relationships are not linear. Nonacademic authors can consistently attract more policy citations, whether publishing alone or collaborating with academics. An article should ideally cite no more than 13 disciplinary subjects. No significant trade‐off between scholarly and policy impact as scholarly citations and the academic reputation of authors often translate into policy citations. These findings offer novel and concrete insights into optimizing academic research for policy impact.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.