Search

The two aims of this study were to: 1) identify the 100 most impactful contributors to English-language gerontological journals, and 2) map their respective disciplinary affiliations to help illuminate the perspectives shaping gerontological discourse. Toward that end, we conducted a secondary data analysis of a publicly available database of the world's leading scientists. After extracting all scientists in the gerontological category, we rank ordered them according to a composite measure of scholarly impact that controls for self-citations and author order while also calculating other bibliometric statistics. Disciplinary affiliations were assigned based upon the Classification of Instructional Programs codes developed by the National Center for Education Statistics at the United States Department of Education. The results reveal the mean contributor to the gerontological literature published 241.15 (SD = 203.95) papers and – after correcting for self-citations – had an h-index of 50.05 (SD = 25.00), and an hm-index 23.67 (SD = 7.50). A diverse array of professional affiliations characterized the contributors with a plurality being located in the health professions category, followed by the biological and biomedical science, and social sciences categories. The results reveal that gerontology is home to some of the world's leading scientists. Leveraging their expertise can help advance the field's collective knowledge development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine established the Pittman Scholars Program in 2015 to elevate scientific impact and to support the recruitment and retention of highly competitive junior faculty. The authors examined the impact of this program on research productivity and on faculty retention. The authors evaluated publications and extramural grant awards and available demographic data for the Pittman Scholars compared to all junior faculty in the Heersink School of Medicine. From 2015 to 2021, the program awarded a diverse group of 41 junior faculty members across the institution. For this cohort, ninety-four new extramural grants were awarded and 146 grant applications were submitted since the inception of the scholar award. Pittman Scholars published a total of 411 papers during the term of the award. The faculty retention rate of the scholars was 95%, comparable to that of all Heersink junior faculty, with 2 recipients being recruited to other institutions. The implementation of the Pittman Scholars Program has been an effective strategy to celebrate scientific impact and acknowledge junior faculty members as outstanding scientists at our institution. The Pittman Scholars award allows junior faculty to use funds for their research program, publications, collaborations, and career advancement. The Pittman Scholars are recognized at local, regional, and national levels for the work they are contributing to academic medicine. The program has served as an important pipeline faculty development program and an avenue for individual recognition for research-intensive faculty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study identified the 100 most impactful global contributors to religion journals and mapped their respective disciplinary affiliations. To conduct this investigation, we performed a secondary data analysis of a Scopus-derived database featuring the world's leading scientists. The mean contributor published 51.93 papers, had an h-index of 13.57, and an hm-index 11.50. Most contributors were located in the USA with the most common disciplinary affiliations being religion, non-specialized (n = 22), sociology, non-specialized (n = 21), sociology of religion (n = 20), and theology (n = 11). The results reveal that religion discourse is populated by some of the leading scholars in the world. Leveraging their expertise can help advance the field's knowledge development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand the relationship, in historic preservation, between equity/social justice and the field's intra-disciplinary scholarship by using a critical heritage studies lens. Intra-disciplinary scholarship is defined as the scholarly literature produced by the 58 tenured and tenure-track faculty associated with historic preservation degree programmes in the United States through the end of 2018. A content analysis of this literature shows a general lack of engagement by authors on issues related to the public's needs, including topics related to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. A citation analysis of this literature reveals meagre faculty productivity and low impact for intra-disciplinary preservation scholarship. In order for the field to sustain itself, it needs to reconsider its anti-intellectual tendencies, increase its socially relevant scholarly publications, and embrace more critical, people-centred approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much work by criminology and criminal justice scholars assesses and ranks doctoral programs and faculty based on productivity measured as number of articles, journal prestige, and grantspersonship. These state-of-the-field publications provide important information about the subset of Ph.D. programs and their faculty. Less attention is paid in these discussions to productivity among faculty at master's degree granting programs; omitting a considerable bulk of scholars. Using self-report survey data from 34 residential criminal justice master's degree granting programs, the present research explores productivity of faculty by examining a variety of publication outlets and grantspersonship to assess contributions to the field over a five-year period, 2014–2018. This study is a first step in understanding the strengths of master's level program faculty and their representation in the discipline. The paper concludes by outlining future considerations for research to extend the discussion on faculty productivity to scholars from a wider-range of programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]