References
- Aksnes, D. W. 2006. Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 57 (2):169–85. doi:https://doi.org/10.100/asi.20262.
- Batchelor, M. 2018. America’s top 100 Universities in research and development spending in 2017. CEOWORLD Magazine, November 30. Accessed June 5, 2020. https://ceoworld.biz/2018/11/30/americas-top-100-universities-in-research-and-development-spending-in-2017/
- Big Ten Academic Alliance. 2019. 2017 Big Ten Academic Alliance Data. Accessed June 5, 2020. https://www.btaa.org/docs/default-source/research-data/at-a-glance_btaa2017.pdf?sfvrsn=d3a148f3_2
- Big Ten Academic Alliance. n.d. History of the Big Ten Academic Alliance. Accessed June 5, 2020. https://www.btaa.org/about/history
- Dorta-González, P., and Y. Santana-Jiménez. 2019. Characterizing the highly cited articles: A large-scale bibliometric analysis of the top 1% most cited research. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 24 (2):23–39. doi:https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol24no2.2.
- Figg, W. D., L. Dunn, D. J. Liewehr, S. M. Steinberg, P. W. Thurman, J. C. Barrett, and J. Birkinshaw. 2006. Scientific collaboration results in higher citation rates of published articles. Pharmacotherapy 26 (6):759–67. doi:https://doi.org/10.1592/phco.26.6.759.
- Lee, D. M. 2019. Predictive power of conference‑related factors on citation rates of conference papers. Scientometrics 118:281–304. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2943-z.
- Levitt, J. M., and M. Thelwall. 2008. Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 59 (12):1973–84. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20914.
- Martín-Martín, A., E. Orduna-Malea, J. M. Ayllón, and E. D. López-Cózar. 2016. A two-sided academic landscape: Snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013). Revista española de Documentación Científica 39:4. doi:https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1405.
- Martín-Martín, A., E. Orduna-Malea, M. Thelwall, and E. Delgado-López-Cózar 2019. Google scholar, web of science, and scopus: Which is best for me? LSE Impact Blog (blog), December 3. London School of Economics and Political Science. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/12/03/google-scholar-web-of-science-and-scopus-which-is-best-for-me/.
- Marx, W., and L. Bornmann. 2015. On the causes of subject-specific citation rates in Web of Science. Scientometrics 102:1823–27. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1499-9.
- Noorhidawati, A., M. K. Yanti Idaya Aspura, M. N. Zahila, and A. Abrizah. 2017. Characteristics of Malaysian highly cited papers. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 22 (2):85–99. doi:https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol22no2.6.
- Slyder, J. B., B. R. Stein, B. S. Sams, D. M. Walker, B. J. Beale, J. J. Feldhaus, and C. A. Copenheaver. 2011. Citation pattern and lifespan: A comparison of discipline, institution, and individual. Scientometrics 89:955–66. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0467-x.
- University of Chicago. 2017. Faculty and staff: At a glance. Accessed June 5, 2020. https://web.archive.org/web/20190331053902/https://data.uchicago.edu/at_a_glance.php?cid=16&pid=2&sel=atg
- University of Chicago. 2018. Autumn quarter 2017 statistical Reports. Accessed June 5, 2020. https://uchicago.app.box.com/s/trkqpw1ztu0lc4niahgz0y7g6eyqt6z6/file/330473736896