https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_org&hl=en&org=822421448073898796 ¹, ², ³
Caveats:
1: Some of these faculty are no longer at UO and many UO faculty have not yet claimed their pubs on Google (which is very easy to do).
2: This is a ridiculous way to measure “Research Excellence”, whatever that is. Of course if we added h-indexes, impact-factors, and grants llike Academic Analytics does, then these metrics would appear to be more credible – but would they be any more useful for deciding which department should get more faculty lines?
| Rank of Excellence | Name | Citations | Title/Afilliation |
| #1 | David M Strom | 150,153 | Prof of Physics, UO |
| #2 | Paul Slovic | 147,893 | Decision Research and UO |
| #3 | Eric Torrence | 136,713 | UO |
| #4 | Michael I. Posner | 124,364 | Prof Emeritus of psychology UO |
| #5 | Mark Johnson | 93,148 | Philip H. Knight Prof of Liberal Arts and Sciences, UO |
| #6 | Raymond Frey | 82,964 | Department of Physics, UO |
| #7 | William H Starbuck | 44,971 | UO |
| #8 | David A. McCormick | 38,787 | Prof, UO; Prof Emeritus, Yale University |
| #9 | John Postlethwait | 28,135 | Prof of Biology, UO |
| #10 | Alan D. Meyer | 22,406 | Prof of Management, UO |
| #11 | Patrick J. Bartlein | 21,006 | Prof of Geography, UO |
| #12 | Helen Neville | 19,618 | Prof, Psychology and Neuroscience, UO |
| #13 | cq doe | 18,471 | Univ Oregon |
| #14 | Dipongkar Talukder | 17,694 | Postdoctoral Research Scholar, UO |
| #15 | Russell J. Donnelly | 17,344 | UO |
| #16 | Linda Price | 17,303 | Prof of Marketing, UO |
| #17 | Joan Acker | 17,134 | Sociology, UO |
| #18 | John Bellamy Foster | 16,757 | Prof of Sociology, UO |
| #19 | Jon Erlandson | 15,562 | Prof of Anthropology, Executive Director of the Museum of Natural & Cultural Historty … |
| #20 | Lynn Kahle | 15,535 | Prof of Marketing, UO |
| #21 | Gregory John Retallack | 15,531 | UO |
| #22 | Judith H. Hibbard | 14,650 | Prof Emerita at the UO |
| #23 | Sanjay Srivastava | 14,642 | Associate Prof of Psychology, UO |
| #24 | Nicholas Allen | 14,469 | UO |
| #25 | Brendan Bohannan | 13,609 | Prof of Environmental Studies and Biology, UO |
| #26 | Greg Bothun | 13,244 | UO |
| #27 | David O. Conover | 12,695 | UO |
| #28 | Kraimer, Maria | 12,670 | UO |
| #29 | Shannon Boettcher | 12,148 | Assoc. Prof. Chemistry, UO |
| #30 | Scott Seibert | 11,663 | UO |
| #31 | Jennifer Freyd | 11,493 | UO |
| #32 | Michael G. Raymer | 11,428 | Prof of Physics, Department of Physics and Oregon Center for Optics, University of … |
| #33 | James E. Hutchison | 10,988 | Lokey-Harrington Chair in Chemistry, UO |
| #34 | Albert O. Edwards, MD, PhD | 10,621 | Oregon Retina, Oregon Health Sciences University, UO, Mayo Clinic … |
| #35 | Bruce Bowerman | 10,586 | Institute of Molecular Biology, UO |
| #36 | Douglas Hintzman | 10,316 | Emeritus Prof of Psychology, UO |
| #37 | ulrich mayr | 10,219 | UO |
| #38 | William Cresko | 9,899 | UO |
| #39 | Bruce Blonigen | 9,526 | UO |
| #40 | Jessica L. Green | 9,371 | UO |
| #41 | Phil Fisher | 9,308 | UO |
| #42 | Michael M. Haley | 9,283 | Richard M. & Patricia H. Noyes Prof of Chemistry, UO |
| #43 | Christopher Minson | 9,064 | Prof of Human Physiology, UO |
| #44 | T. Bettina Cornwell | 9,032 | Prof of Marketing, UO |
| #45 | George W Evans | 8,848 | UO |
| #46 | Gerard Saucier | 8,390 | Prof of Psychology, UO |
| #47 | Louis Moses | 8,232 | Department of Psychology, UO |
| #48 | Craig M. Young | 8,143 | Prof of Biology, UO |
| #49 | Alice Barkan | 8,123 | UO |
| #50 | Reza Rejaie | 8,026 | Prof of Computer and Information Science, UO |
| #51 | Andrew Karduna | 7,985 | UO |
| #52 | alan l shanks | 7,793 | UO |
| #53 | Patrick C. Phillips | 7,616 | Prof of Biology, Institute for Ecology and Evolution, UO |
| #54 | David C. Johnson | 7,526 | Prof of Chemistry, UO |
| #55 | John R Halliwill, PhD | 7,426 | Department of Human Physiology, UO |
| #56 | John Conery | 7,380 | Prof of Biology, UO |
| #57 | Richard York | 7,344 | Prof of Sociology and Environmental Studies, UO |
| #58 | Scott Bridgham | 7,341 | Prof of Biology and Environmental Studies, UO |
| #59 | Nash Unsworth | 7,336 | UO |
| #60 | Michael V. Russo | 7,278 | Lundquist Prof of Sustainable Management, UO |
| #61 | Stephen Fickas | 7,171 | Prof of Computer and Information Science UO |
| #62 | Trudy Ann Cameron | 7,020 | RF Mikesell Prof of Environmental and Resource Economics, UO |
| #63 | Paul J. Wallace | 6,853 | UO |
| #64 | Robert M. O’Brien | 6,685 | Prof of Sociology, UO |
| #65 | Allen D. Malony | 6,588 | UO |
| #66 | Eric A. Johnson | 6,567 | Associate Prof, Inst. of Molecular Biology, UO. Founder, SNPsaurus |
| #67 | Jean Stockard | 6,539 | UO |
| #68 | Ronald B. Mitchell | 6,444 | Prof of Political Science, UO |
| #69 | Gordon C. Nagayama Hall | 6,314 | UO |
| #70 | Leslie Leve | 6,137 | UO |
| #71 | Marjorie Taylor | 5,860 | UO |
| #72 | Hailin Wang | 5,729 | Prof, Department of Physics, UO, Eugene, Oregon, USA |
| #73 | David Krinsley | 5,614 | Courtesy Prof of Earth Sciences, UO |
| #74 | Ilya Bindeman | 5,543 | Prof of Geology, U of Oregon |
| #75 | William T Harbaugh | 5,457 | Prof of Economics, UO |
| #76 | Jennifer H. Pfeifer | 5,456 | Associate Prof, UO |
| #77 | Yuan Xu | 5,446 | Prof of Mathematics, UO |
| #78 | SJ van Enk | 5,405 | UO |
| #79 | Karen Guillemin | 5,343 | Prof of Biology, UO |
| #80 | Li-Shan Chou | 5,294 | UO |
| #81 | Kim Sheehan | 5,294 | UO |
| #82 | Ray Weldon | 5,154 | Prof of Geology, UO |
| #83 | CJ Pascoe | 5,082 | Associate Prof of Sociology, UO |
| #84 | Dietrich Belitz | 4,982 | UO |
| #85 | Josh Roering | 4,860 | Prof, Department of Earth Sciences, UO |
| #86 | Scott DeLancey | 4,849 | UO |
| #87 | Sara D. Hodges | 4,683 | UO |
| #88 | George von Dassow | 4,658 | UO |
| #89 | Holly Arrow | 4,554 | Prof of Psychology, UO |
| #90 | Douglas R. Toomey | 4,448 | UO |
| #91 | Joe Stone | 4,377 | Prof of economics UO |
| #92 | Daniel G. Gavin | 4,328 | Associate Prof, Department of Geography, UO |
| #93 | Ken Prehoda | 4,322 | Prof of Chemistry, UO |
| #94 | Jeremy Piger | 4,184 | Prof of Economics, UO |
| #95 | Michael Pluth | 4,126 | Associate Prof, UO |
| #96 | Victoria DeRose | 4,038 | Prof of Chemistry and Biochemistry, UO |
| #97 | Elizabeth Stormshak | 4,005 | Prof, Counseling Psychology, UO |
| #98 | Lynn Stephen | 3,990 | UO |
| #99 | Sameer Shende | 3,943 | Director, Performance Research Laboratory, UO and President, ParaTools … |
| #100 | Kryn Stankunas | 3,898 |
Associate Prof of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology, UO
|
3: Duck basketball coach Dana Altman’s RPI rank has now dropped to #89, after UO gave him a contract amendment in June that raised his buyout cost to $14M.
Faculty lines should go to new emerging areas of research and inquiries and to new approaches. The last thing that faculty lines should have ever have gone to are DEPARTMENTS – once upon a time, immediate post WW 2 that was probably necessary but not any more.
For resource poor Universities, like us, this inevitably pits departments against each other and cultivates a Dean’s Leadership that only cares about budgets and protection and not about advancing and evolving the academic mission of a University.
Interesting, but doesn’t seem very highly correlated with the quantity of actual useful knowledge generated.
only engineers produce useful knowledge, therefore the UO has no entrants in this contest
UO seems to keep up with, or surpass, comparable institutions when it comes to top 5-6 cited researchers. However, it doesn’t keep up with the pack after that.
Of course, there are a few retired researchers that would probably each have a could hundred thousand citations (Franklin Stahl, Brian Matthews, and recent hire David Wineland) if they had Google Scholar profiles.
That said citation quantity does not = quality as many others have stated.
As an example of how these lists can be based on error-filled data, #54 should drop a dozen positions as the most-highly cited paper on his profile is not his but a similarly-named person. Google Scholar does just an OK job in attributing papers correctly.
#75’s most cited paper (884 cites) was published in 2002. It was an attempt to replicate the results of “Economic Growth and the Environment” https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=f46No0UAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra which was published by others in 1995 (6036 cites).
We found serious errors in the data used in the 1995 paper, and showed that fixing these and making slight changes in the empirical specification reversed the results.
The original 1995 paper was cited 475 times last year. Our 2002 paper was cited 69 times.
Some people are making a good living off sloppy science, and UO’s new metrics plan will reinforce those incentives.
This is a very general phenon; rebuttals often do not erase impact of the original publication, particularly where there are policy implications [ aka: not just scientific knowledge].
See http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/ES10-00142.1/full for a very good study in Fisheries.
Interesting since tax accounting produced by UO accounting faculty was just ranked no. 1 in the world in quality and influence for the past 6 and 12 years by the BYU rankings. BYU rankings are very well respected. None of the faculty are included on this list.
Give us the link!
Fluff: https://business.uoregon.edu/news/accounting-number-one-in-tax-research
and Ranking: http://www.byuaccounting.net/rankings/univrank/rank_university.php?qurank=Tax&sortorder=ranking6
Sorry, Accounting is Fun, but I’ve got some bad news: There are no accounting journals in the list of top 20 Business, Economics, and Management publications: https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=bus
However you might try and convince Dean Nutter to take those metrics with a grain of salt. The Journal of Tourism Management is #14, while Econometrica is only #15.
Say, anyone interested in working on a collaborative cutting-edge interdisciplinary paper on tourism management and the 2021 Track Championships? Our Board of Trustees will love it.
The Oregonian has published two recent pieces on home grown research:
-One on top researchers
http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2018/02/oregons_science_superstars_a_l.html
-And another on research driving the economy of the future
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2018/02/is_oregon_great_science_projec.html
#7’s most cited pub appears to have been written by someone else, and makes up MOST of his cits. Since its an econ pub, perhaps UOM can explain it all to us.
Actually,
#2 ,#7 & #15 all claim many citations for publications not theirs! ….. “Their” most cited pub . Odd to say the least.
#15 is deceased as well and has been for about 5 years
Hard to tell who set up #15s account, probably not him,but it was someone from UO. But the Donnelly had a distinguished career, and received several noteworthy honors. Certainly aided UO’s external reputation. In science, anyway.
Like many folks I use GS with a grain of salt, and always look more carefully; I prefer web-of-science, as do organizations like NRC, AAU and so forth.
Funny, but when I read Banavar’s description of the use UO wants to make of impact METRICS it all seems quite reasonable. Us hard science types are pretty used to being judged by pub counts, citation counts, grant $, honors [ like membership in NAS, etc] and so forth.
George Streisinger early work had earned election to NAS before he began to develop the zebra fish system; indeed his early work probably made his investment in the long term fish project possible, and the lack of quick pubs that resulted during it.
Every one knows the cit counts cant JUST BE COMPARED across disciplines;…. but I can compare within disciplines, just like NRC does in ranking doctoral programs.
One might conclude from UOM’s extremely critical recent focus on impact metrics that they are some great evil, or at least often subject to misuse; I have more faith in Banavar, et al [ I know some of his own work quite well, and really respect his judgement].
yes RJD was very impactful in a lot of areas and I don’t believe
he was properly acknowledged for these other areas.
He did raise the UO profile, considerably in my view.
I am just saying he doesn;t belong a list that presumably is related to still active researchers at the UO
I wonder if comparable universities can match the U of O in the number of top-100 professors who have sued the university.
Checking myself out, I find that I’m credited with two articles.
One was a programming piece published in Byte magazine in 1986 — yes, a mere 32 years ago — and is correctly cited. The other, apparently picked randomly from thousands of pieces I wrote in 30 years at The Register-Guard, may or may not have been by me.
Google provides an abstract written in academese that is like nothing I have ever written even in my worst nightmares, but no link to the actual story, which I can’t recall from the abstract.
But I’m sure the system is totally accurate.
Folks may want to take a look at:
https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/metrics.html#coverage
There are some important limits on the scholar data sets.
If you’re interested in a more robust (and individual scholar centric) system you might want to look into the ORCID:
https://orcid.org/
UO isn’t listed in the current org list…
Yes there are lots of these databases and various H-index calculators out there. There is also the G-index proposed in 2006 which has a lot of merit and gives a better indication of impact.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-006-0144-7
In my own case of meager scholarship (not sure I can even make the top 999 at UO) I have compared various databases and found that they all return the same numbers to an accuracy of 5-10% – although this is name dependent.
Since I generally publish (again meagerly) as Grand Dog Poobah
my name is (GDP) is generally unique as there are not that many articles, particularly in economics journals, about GDP.
Can we now refer to you as “Old #75” ?
(Nice to see a Phil Hendrie fan on this forum!)
I’m mostly unfamiliar with his work…sadly…Ted Bell is my actual name
Citations are but one of myriad metrics to measure “excellence”. My “excellence” would decrease somewhat as my #1 cited paper is something I did as a PhD student and thus has NOTHING to do with UO. Based on what I know of other top 40 people, especially those within my own department, many others would be similarly impacted/”demoted” as their top cited papers were from their PhD and/or postdoc periods.
This is one of the arguments in favor of using the G-index as it does a better job of measuring “sustained” citation over one’s career.
One can use raw citations as some kind of research deadwood indicator. Divide a person’s career up into two halves and take the ratio – if the ratio of the first half to the second half is greater than X (X = 10?) – then that is an indicator that they are now longer “relevant” to that particular research. The G-index kind of
does this.
All I am saying is that citation behavior over time carries with it a lot more information than a number on spreadsheet.
In the sciences if you are a student or a postdoc with a very famous advisor, you have papers that are cited many times. Yes: your advisor is a famous person and UofO would like to have that person here. Sometimes you can become a famous scientist too, but it is not a given.
And if you make a good review article, you have good chances of being cited multiple times by colleagues that are looking for citing a comprehensive review of the field. However, if you keep writing review articles and you don’t make new science, you are a overly cited, dead duck, scientist.