The most-cited scholars and works in police studies

Richard A. Wright: Department of Criminology, Sociology, Social Work, and Geography, Arkansas State University, Arkansas, and

J. Mitchell Miller: College of Criminal Justice, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina

ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The authors wish to thank Victor E. Kappeler for his help with the research for this paper, Geoffrey P. Alpert and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier draft, and Judy Lestansky for her editorial assistance.

In the last few years, numerous studies have assessed the relative prestige of both journals and individual scholars in the general criminology and criminal justice literature (Cohn and Farrington, 1990, 1994a, 1994b, 1996; Regoli et al., 1982; Stack, 1987; Williams et al., 1995; Wright, 1995; Wright and Cohn, 1996; Wright and Soma, 1996). Wright and his associates recently have extended this analysis to the study of the most-cited scholars and works in several research specialties, including critical criminology (Wright and Friedrichs, forthcoming), criminological theory (Wright and Rourke, forthcoming), and women and crime studies (Wright and Sheridan, forthcoming). To date, however, no study has examined the citation patterns in specific research areas relating to the criminal justice system: the police, courts, and corrections. By focusing on police studies, our paper begins the process of extending citation analysis to specialized research on criminal justice subsystems.

Through an analysis of 370 articles and research notes appearing in the area of police studies published in Criminology, Justice Quarterly, and four academic periodicals devoted to policing (American Journal of Police, Police Forum, Police Studies, and Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy) from 1991 to 1995, we report the 50 most-cited scholars and the 36 most-cited works[1]. Our lists of the most-cited scholars and works in police studies are compared to similar findings taken from general criminology and criminal justice publications. We conclude with some thoughts about the importance of extending citation analysis to police studies in particular, and to criminal justice specialty areas in general.

Existing research

Studies of the most-cited scholars and works in criminology can be traced to Wolfgang, Figlio, and Thornberry's (1978) Evaluating Criminology, a landmark examination of the citation patterns in all known journal articles and research books published in criminology and criminal justice from 1945 to 1972. Because Wolfgang et al. (1978) ignored textbooks, Shichor (1982) soon followed with an analysis of the most-cited scholars in 20 introductory criminology textbooks published from 1976 to 1980.

Recent studies of general citation patterns in criminology and criminal justice have been done by Cohn and Farrington (1990, 1994a, 1994b, 1996) and Wright and his associates (Wright, 1995, forthcoming; Wright and Cohn, 1996; Wright and Soma, 1996). Cohn and Farrington (1990, 1994a, 1994b, 1996) have identified the most-cited scholars and works in leading journals. For example, from an analysis of six American criminology and criminal justice journals published from 1986 to 1990, Cohn and Farrington (1994b) ranked the 47 most-cited scholars. Similarly, Cohn and Farrington (1996) ranked the 53 most-cited scholars in the annual Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (Volumes 1 to 17), and the 75 most-cited criminology and criminal justice works in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) from 1979 to 1993.

Wright and his associates (Wright, 1995, forthcoming; Wright and Cohn, 1996; Wright and Soma, 1996) extended the study of the most-cited scholars to introductory criminology and criminal justice textbooks. Studies of textbooks published from 1989 to 1993 identified:

the 47 most-cited scholars in 23 introductory criminology textbooks (Wright, 1995);

the 22 most-cited scholars in 16 introductory criminal justice textbooks (Wright and Cohn, 1996); and

the 16 most-cited scholars in 39 introductory criminology and criminal justice textbooks (Wright, forthcoming).

Citation studies have been criticized for a number of reasons. For example, it is sometimes noted that these studies do not distinguish between positive and negative evaluations of cited works (Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b). Still, Cole's (1975) thematic content analysis of citations to Robert K. Merton's "Social structure and anomie" (1938) shows that the vast majority of citations to this well-known essay elicited either a positive or a neutral response; only 6 percent of the citations were critical of Merton's arguments. The consensus among the citation researchers throughout the social sciences is that authors and works are seldom cited for the purposes of criticism (Chapman, 1989; Garfield, 1979).

Studies that rely on the SSCI (e.g. Cohn and Farrington, 1990, 1996) have some special problems. For example, the SSCI indexes only a few of the many journals published in criminology and criminal justice: citations in non-indexed journals are missing in these studies. Perhaps worse, the SSCI lists only first authors of works; publications with only first authors are routinely tabulated incorrectly in studies that use the SSCI database.

Three recent studies have criticized existing citation research for ignoring the important contributions in particular specializations in criminology and criminal justice. These studies found little similarity between the lists of the most-cited scholars and works when leading journals and introductory textbooks were compared to publications in critical criminology (Wright and Friedrichs, forthcoming), criminological theory (Wright and Rourke, forthcoming), and women and crime studies (Wright and Sheridan, forthcoming). This research suggests the importance of examining the citation patterns in specialty areas in criminology and criminal justice. In particular, specialized research on the primary criminal justice subsystems - the police, courts, and corrections - deserves the attention of citation analysts. Here, we begin this analysis by identifying the most-cited scholars and works in recent police studies publications.

Research design

We analyzed all the articles and research notes in the area of police studies in six periodicals appearing from 1991 to 1995: American Journal of Police, Criminology, Justice Quarterly, Police Forum, Police Studies, and Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy - to compile our lists of the most-cited scholars and works (see footnote 1). Criminology and Justice Quarterly were included because they were rated as the most influential academic journals in criminology (Criminology) and criminal justice (Justice Quarterly) in two recent examinations of the prestige of criminology and criminal justice periodicals (see Cohn et al. forthcoming; Williams et al. 1995); only articles/research notes clearly focused on policing issues were analyzed in these journals. The other four titles were selected because they ranked as the most influential periodicals in the area of police studies in the two recent rankings of journals (Cohn et al. forthcoming; Williams et al. 1995); all the articles/research notes were analyzed in these publications. Altogether, 370 articles/research notes were examined in the study[2].

Other types of publications - textbooks and research monographs/books - were excluded from our analysis. Textbooks on law enforcement (e.g. Alpert and Dunham, 1997; Walker, 1992) were omitted because of controversies over the validity of citation studies of textbooks as measures of scholarly influence (see Allen, 1983; Green, forthcoming; Wright, 1995; Wright and Cohn, 1996). Allen (1983) and Green (forthcoming) argue that publishers and reviewers may pressure textbook authors into deleting "cutting edge" citations to recent, important studies written by lesser-known scholars, in favor of standard citations to well-established researchers. This could jeopardize the validity of citation studies of textbooks as measures of the current influence of scholarship.

Analyzing the citation patterns in research monographs and books would require the difficult task of compiling a comprehensive bibliography of all known recent academic books dealing with law enforcement; these publications would then need to be located and individually examined. Similar logistical complications have prompted recent researchers to analyze journals instead of research monographs and books when conducting citation studies in academic publications other than textbooks (see Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b, 1996; Wright and Rourke, forthcoming; Wright and Sheridan, forthcoming).

In recent analyses of most-cited scholars and works in journals (see Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b, 1996), citations were tallied from the references at the ends of articles. Because a few of the articles in Police Forum exclusively incorporated references in footnotes, we had to use a far more cumbersome and time-consuming means to count citations: in our study, each mention of a scholar/work - in the text or in a substantive footnote - accompanied by a reference was counted as a citation. We also counted the citations for all the authors in publications with multiple authors.

In most prior citation studies, self-citations have been a problem for researchers. Some analysts have excluded these citations from their counts (see Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b, 1996); others routinely included self-citations (see Wright, 1995, forthcoming; Wright and Soma, 1996). Neither approach is entirely satisfactory: excluding self-citations risks underestimating the influence of prolific authors, responsible for numerous publications examined in a study (in effect, these scholars are ranked against others based on fewer publications). Including self-citations risks overestimating the influence of scholars who are fond of citing their own work.

Wright and his associates (see Wright and Friedrichs, forthcoming; Wright and Rourke, forthcoming; Wright and Sheridan, forthcoming) recently introduced a formula to adjust for self-citations. "C[sub]2" (the adjusted number of citations) is calculated as follows:

C[sub]1

C[sub]2 = C[sub]1 + [sub]--- (P[sub]2),

P[sub]1

where "C[sub]1" is the total number of citations to a scholar in publications not written by the scholar, "P[sub]1" is the total number of publications not written by a scholar that cite his/her work, and "P[sub]2" is the total number of publications written by the scholar that contain self-citations. For all the publications that cite a scholar, this formula adjusts for self-citations by projecting the average number of citations the scholar receives in works that he/she did not write into the works that he/she wrote[3]. We used this formula to calculate adjusted citation scores for each extensively cited scholar who wrote at least one article or research note examined in our study that contained a self-citation, although the adjusted scores were used to rank scholars and works only when these estimates were lower than the actual counts that included self-citations[4].

Following Cohn and Farrington (1996), we used both incidence and prevalence measures to rank the most-cited scholars and works. Incidence is the total number of times that scholars/works were cited in the 370 articles/research notes that we examined; prevalence is the total number of publications that cite a scholar/work. Most previous citation studies (Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b; Wright, 1995, forthcoming; Wright and Cohn, 1996; Wright and Soma, 1996) largely ranked scholars by incidence of citations, not prevalence. When citation studies ignore prevalence measures, they risk overestimating the influence of scholars who are cited heavily, but only in a handful of publications.

Both incidence and prevalence measures were used to compile our lists of the most-cited scholars and works (see Tables I and II). We implemented simple procedures to offset the influence of "citation outliers"; i.e. scholars or works that were cited repeatedly in several publications, but nowhere else. To be considered for our list of the 50 most-cited scholars (Table I), authors had to be cited in at least five articles/research notes (as a prevalence measure); to appear on our list of most-cited works (Table II), publications had to be cited at least 20 times (incidence) in at least ten articles/research notes (prevalence).

Findings

Table I reports the 50 most-cited scholars in the 370 police studies articles/research notes that we examined. The table ranks these scholars by incidence and prevalence of citations. In incidence, Lawrence W. Sherman ranked first with 331 citations, 114 and 129 citations ahead, respectively, of David H. Bayley (in second place) and Herman Goldstein (third place). Sherman also finished first in prevalence, with a total of 85 of the 370 articles/research notes (or 23.0 percent) citing him at least once.

Eight scholars - Bayley, Goldstein, George L. Kelling, Peter K. Manning, Sherman, Jerome H. Skolnick, Samuel Walker, and James Q. Wilson - ranked among the top ten both in incidence and prevalence of citations. Although Geoffrey P. Alpert and Robert C. Trojanowicz placed among the top ten in incidence of citations, Stephen D. Mastrofski and Albert J. Reiss, Jr. replaced them on the list of the ten most-cited scholars in prevalence.

Some similarity between incidence and prevalence measures is apparent when scanning through the rest of Table I. Altogether, 40 scholars who ranked among the most-cited in incidence also were among the most-cited in prevalence (for the two sets of names, r = 0.80)[5].

Still, a close examination of Table I shows the advantage of ranking the most-cited scholars by incidence and by prevalence of citations. Many scholars ranked similarly in incidence and prevalence (for example, cf. Bayley, Goldstein, Kelling, Manning, Sherman, Walker, and Wilson). However, several scholars (cf. Alpert, Richard A. Berk, Roger G. Dunham, John E. Eck, Richard V. Ericson, Robert M. Langworthy, Susan Ehrlich Martin, William Ker Muir, Jr, Clifford D. Searing, Trojanowicz, David L. Weisburd, and Robert E. Worden) ranked notably higher in incidence than in prevalence, while a number of others (cf. Egon Bittner, Lee P. Brown, Bonnie Bucqueroux, Jack R. Greene, Tony Jefferson, Daniel B. Kennedy, Carl B. Klockars, Mastrofski, Arthur Niederhoffer, Anthony M. Pate, Reiss, Wesley G. Skogan, Skolnick, J. Van Maanen, and Mary Ann Wycoff) ranked higher in prevalence than in incidence. If this were a conventional citation study that primarily emphasized the measurement of the incidence of citations to the exclusion of prevalence, the influence of the former scholars would be exaggerated, while the contributions of the latter would be underestimated.

Further inspection of Table I suggests that some of the most-cited scholars in police studies are known for the diversity of their research, while others have reputations as specialists. Among the more versatile researchers in Table I are Bayley, known for his pioneering work on police and minority group relations (Bayley and Mendelsohn, 1969), comparative police studies (Bayley, 1985), and community policing (Skolnick and Bayley, 1986), and Sherman, known for his pathbreaking studies of the quality of police education (Sherman, 1978), police policies related to domestic violence (Sherman, 1992b), and police crackdowns (Sherman, 1990, 1992a). Most-cited police studies researchers who are better known as specialists include Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux (1990) in community policing research, James J. Fyfe (1979, 1988) in deadly force studies, and Martin (1980, 1990) in research on women in policing.

A comparison of the most-cited scholars in police studies to recent general citation analyses of criminology and criminal justice journals and textbooks shows little similarity in the scholars who are cited extensively[6]. For example, only six names on Cohn and Farrington's (1994b) list of the 47 most-cited scholars in six leading American criminology and criminal justice journals also appear among the 50 most-cited scholars in police studies: Berk, Joan Petersilia, Reiss, Sherman, Skogan, and Wilson (for the two lists, r = 0.12). Likewise, there are six matches - Peter W. Greenwood, Petersilia, Reiss, Sherman, Skogan, and Wilson - between Table I and Cohn and Farrington's (1996) 53 most-cited scholars in 17 volumes of Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (r = 0.12). Only five matches - Petersilia, Reiss, Sherman, Skolnick, and Wilson - appear when our data are compared to Wright's (1995) 47 most-cited scholars in 23 recent introductory criminology textbooks (r = 0.10). Finally, ten names on Wright and Cohn's (1996) list of the 22 most-cited scholars in 16 recent introductory criminal justice textbooks also appear among the most-cited scholars in police studies: Bayley, Goldstein, Greenwood, Kelling, Petersilia, Reiss, Sherman, Skolnick, Walker, and Wilson (r = 0.28). Clearly, the important scholarly contributions of many prominent police studies researchers largely have been overlooked in previous general citation studies.

Table II reports the 36 most-cited works, ranked by incidence and prevalence, in the 370 articles/research notes that we examined[7]. The table is dominated by a number of classic studies of law enforcement conducted from the mid-1960s to the early 1980s, including Banton (1964), Bayley and Mendelsohn (1969), Bittner (1970, 1980), Black (1980), Brown (1981), Fogelson (1977), Goldstein (1977), Manning (1977), Martin (1980), Muir (1977), Niederhoffer (1967), Reiss (1971), Rubinstein (1973), Skolnick (1975), and Wilson (1968). Apart from these early influential studies, Table II clearly shows the importance of research on community policing/problem solving approaches in the recent police studies literature, with five works representing these perspectives: Eck and Spelman (1987), Goldstein (1990), Kelling and Moore (1988), Skolnick and Bayley (1986), and Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux (1990). In addition, three of the most-cited works - Lane (1967), Monkonnen (1981), and Walker (1977) - are well-known historical studies of the development and reform of policing, while three other works are pathbreaking evaluation studies of the effectiveness of police patrols (Kelling et al., 1974), criminal investigations (Greenwood et al., 1977), and mandatory arrest policies for males apprehended for domestic assault (Sherman and Berk, 1984).

Table II permits a comparison of the most-cited works in police studies journals by incidence and prevalence measures. Publications that are cited frequently in many places (high incidence and high prevalence) - including Goldstein (1977, 1990), Skolnick (1975), Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux (1990), and Wilson (1968) - have had a deep and a broad impact on the police studies literature. These are stellar works that are discussed extensively and cited in many places. Most of the works that are cited frequently, but in fewer places (higher incidence, lower prevalence) - e.g. Banton (1964), Brown (1981), Carter, Sapp, and Stephens (1989), Greenwood et al., (1977), Maguire and Pastore (1995), Martin (1980), Muir (1977), and Sherman and Berk (1984) - have had a deep but a narrow impact on recent scholarship. These publications are cited somewhat selectively, but tend to be discussed extensively when they are cited. Finally, works that typically are cited only once or twice, but in many different places (lower incidence, higher prevalence), include Bittner (1970, 1980), Fogelson (1977), Kelling and Moore (1988), Kelling et al. (1974), Manning (1977), Niederhoffer (1967), Reiss (1971), and Rubinstein (1973). These publications appear to have the enviable status of the "standard citation": in effect, they are so well-known in the police studies literature that they "need no introduction" (and require little discussion).

By comparing Tables I and II, it is clear that some scholars are cited heavily in the police studies publications mostly because of one work: Michael Banton for The Policeman in the Community (1964), Michael K. Brown for Working the Street: Police Discretion and the Dilemmas of Reform (1981), Bucqueroux for Community Policing: A Contemporary Perspective (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1990), Muir for Police: Streetcorner Politicians (1977), Niederhoffer for Behind the Shield: The Police in Urban Society (1967), and Jonathan Rubinstein for City Police (1973). The opposite extremes are Alpert, Dunham, Fyfe, Greene, and Mastrofski, all of whom ranked among the 25 most-cited scholars in incidence and prevalence of citations despite having no work listed in Table II.

Finally, only one of the most-cited works in the police studies journals - Sherman and Berk (1984) - also rated among the 54 most-cited publications in Cohn and Farrington's (1996) comprehensive study of crime and justice periodicals published from 1986 to 1995[8]. (For the two lists, r = 0.02.) This again shows the importance of conducting a specialized citation analysis in the area of law enforcement; apparently, little insight about specific influential works in police studies can be gained through a general citation analysis of the leading criminology and criminal justice journals.

Summary and discussion

Our study analyzed the most-cited scholars and works in 370 articles and research notes appearing in the area of police studies that were published in Criminology, Justice Quarterly, and four influential policing periodicals from 1991 to 1995. From these articles/research notes, we identified the 50 most-cited scholars and the 36 most-cited works, using both incidence and prevalence measures. When we compared these data to those from several general citation studies of recent leading criminology and criminal justice journals and introductory textbooks, we found few similarities in the most-cited scholars and works.

There is one important caveat to our research: lists of the most-cited scholars and works are no more representative of a discipline or a specialty than the publications that researchers choose to analyze. We believe that the articles/research notes that we selected for our study reasonably reflect the current trends and developments in the police studies literature. We recognize, however, that if other types of publications were included in our research design - e.g. research monographs and/or law enforcement textbooks - results and their implications might be different.

Reporting the most-cited scholars and works in refereed police journals is important for several reasons. First, the comparisons of our findings with the citation studies of leading criminology and criminal justice journals and introductory textbooks suggest that many criminologists and criminal justicians may be unaware of the most influential scholars and works in the police studies literature. We hope that our study will help alert some scholars outside the area of police studies about some of the most significant contributors and contributions inside this specialty.

We also believe that our lists of the most-cited scholars and especially the most-cited works will prove helpful for preparing reading lists in law enforcement courses and for library acquisition purposes. Our list of the 36 most-cited works is a particularly useful resource for assessing the police studies collections of university libraries: criminal justice faculty who either teach law enforcement courses or who are responsible for library acquisitions should see that these works - along with the periodicals that we analyzed in our study - are ordered by campus librarians.

It should be kept in mind that extensive citation sometimes helps the career advancement of academics (Cohn and Farrington, 1994a, 1994b). Scholars on the job market who are searching for a position in a top ranked criminal justice program, or those seeking promotion (especially to the rank of "full professor"), can receive a boost by appearing on a list of the most-cited scholars. Because few police studies researchers have appeared on previous lists of the most-cited scholars in criminology and criminal justice, the career advantages reaped from these studies have gone mostly to scholars in other areas. Our analysis should help to extend these career benefits to influential police studies researchers.

Finally, we hope that our examination of the most-cited scholars and works in the police studies literature will prompt researchers to conduct similar citation analyses in other specialties in criminology and criminal justice. In particular, to complement our analysis of the law enforcement literature, studies are needed of the citation patterns in research on courts and corrections. Together, these analyses could offer considerable insight into the scholars and the works that currently shape research and thinking in criminal justice.

Notes

1. In 1996, the American Journal of Police and Police Studies were merged into a new periodical, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management.

2. Other publications to appear in the journals (e.g. book reviews, comments, and announcements) were excluded from our study.

3. To take one hypothetical example, say that Professor X cites himself/herself 150 times in ten publications, and is cited 30 additional times in 15 other publications. The adjusted citation score (50) probably better estimates his/her impact on scholarship than either the extreme number of total citations when self-citations are counted (180), or the modest number of citations received in the publications that he/she did not write.

4. For readers who wish to re-rank the most-cited scholars in our study by their unadjusted scores, we also report the data including self-citations in Table I.

5. Throughout this study, we used a special formula devised by North et al. (1963) to calculate correlations on interval-level, nonlinear data. Because this formula violates the conventional assumptions associated with correlation, we chose a cautious interpretation of our coefficients, foregoing the usual F tests of statistical significance used in correlation (see Cohn et al. forthcoming).

6. These comparisons must be based on incidence measures, since previous studies of the most-cited scholars in criminology and criminal justice have measured incidence of citations largely to the exclusion of prevalence.

7. In tabulating our list of most-cited works, reprints of publications in edited books or compilations were counted as the original work.

8. This comparison is limited to journals because to date, no study has analyzed the most-cited works in introductory criminology and criminal justice textbooks (see Shichor, 1982; Wright, 1995, 1996a; Wright and Cohn, 1996; Wright and Soma, 1996).

References

1. Allen, H.E. (1983, "Comment: a reaction to 'an analysis of citations in introductory criminology textbooks,'" Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 11, pp. 177-8.

2. Alpert, G. and Dunham, R. (1997, Policing Urban America, third ed., Waveland, Prospect Heights, IL.

3. Banton, M. (1964, The Policeman in the Community, Tavistock, London.

4. Bayley, D.H. (1985, Patterns of Policing: A Comparative International Analysis, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.

5. Bayley, D.H. and Mendelsohn, H. (1969, Minorities and the Police: Confrontation in America, Free Press, New York, NY.

6. Bittner, E. (1970, 1980, The Functions of Police in Modern Society, Oelgschlager, Gunn, and Hain, Weston, MA.

7. Black, D. (1980, The Manners and Customs of the Police, Academic Press, New York, NY.

8. Brown, M.K. (1981, Working the Street: Police Discretion and the Dilemmas of Reform, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY.

9. Carter, D.L., Sapp, A.D. and Stephens, D.W. (1989, The State of Police Education: Policy Directions for the 21st Century, Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC.

10. Chapman, A.J. (1989, "Assessing research: citation count shortcomings, " The Psychologist, Vol. 2, pp. 336-44.

11. Cohn, E.G. and Farrington, D.P. (1990, "Differences between British and American criminology: an analysis of citations, " British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 30, pp. 467-82.

12. Cohn, E.G. and Farrington, D.P. (1994a, "Who are the most influential criminologists in the english-speaking world?" British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 34, pp. 204-25.

13. Cohn, E.G. and Farrington, D.P. (1994b, "Who are the most-cited scholars in major American criminology and criminal justice journals?", Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 22, pp. 517-34.

14. Cohn, E.G. and Farrington, D.P. (1996, "Crime and justice and the criminal justice and criminology literature, " in Tonry, M. (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 20, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 265-300.

15. Cohn, E.G., Farrington, D.P. and Wright, R.A. (forthcoming), Evaluating Criminology and Criminal Justice, Greenwood, Westport, CT.

16. Cole, S. (1975, "The growth of scientific knowledge: theories of deviance as a case study, " in L.A.Merton, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, pp. 175-220.

17. Eck, J.E. and Spelman, W. (1987, Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News, Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC.

18. Fogelson, R.M. (1977, Big City Police, 3rd ed., Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

19. Fyfe, J.J. (1979, "Administrative interventions on police shooting discretion: an empirical examination, " Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 7, pp. 313-25.

20. Fyfe, J.J. (1988, "Police use of deadly force: research and reform, " Justice Quarterly, Vol. 5, pp. 165- 205.

21. Garfield, E. (1979, "Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?", Scientometrics, Vol. 1, pp. 359-75.

22. Goldstein, H. (1977, Policing a Free Society, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.

23. Goldstein, H. (1990, Problem-Oriented Policing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

24. Green, G.S. (forthcoming), "Using citation counts in criminology as measures of intellectual influence: a comment on Wright and Soma, Myself, and Others", Journal of Crime and Justice.

25. Greenwood, P.W., Chaiken, J.M. and Petersilia, J. (1977, The Criminal Investigation Process, D. C. Heath, Lexington, MA.

26. Kelling, G.L. and Moore, M.H. (1988, "The evolving strategy of policing, " Perspectives on Policing, No. 4, National Institute of Justice and Harvard University, Washington, DC.

27. Kelling, G.L., Pate, A.M., Dieckman, D. and Brown, C.E. (1974, The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment: A Summary Report, Police Foundation, Washington, DC.

28. Klockars, C.B. (1985, The Idea of Police, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

29. Lane, R. (1967, Policing the City: Boston, 1822-1885, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

30. Maguire, K. and Pastore, A.L. (Eds) (1995, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994.Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DC.

31. Manning, P. (1977, Police Work: The Social Organization of Policing, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

32. Martin, S.E. (1980, Breaking and Entering: Policewomen on Patrol, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

33. Martin, S.E. (1990, On the Move: The Status of Women in Policing, Police Foundation, Washington, DC.

34. Marx, G. (1988, Undercover: Police Surveillance in America, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

35. Merton, R.K. (1938, "Social structure and anomie, " American Sociological Review, Vol. 3, pp. 672-82.

36. Monkkonen, E. (1981, Police in Urban America, 1860-1920, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.

37. Muir, W.K. Jr (1977, Police: Streetcorner Politicians, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

38. Niederhoffer, A. (1967, Behind the Shield: The Police in Urban Society, Doubleday, Garden City, NY.

39. North, R.C., Holsti, O., Zaninovich, M.G. and Zinnes, D.A. (1963, Content Analysis: A Handbook with Applications for the Study of International Crisis, Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL.

40. Regoli, R.M., Poole, E.D. and Miracle, A.W. (1982, "Assessing the prestige of journals in criminal justice: a research note, " Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 10, pp. 57-67.

41. Reiner, R. (1992, The Politics of the Police, 2nd ed., Harvester Wheatsheaf, London.

42. Reiss, A.J. Jr (1971, The Police and the Public, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

43. Rubinstein, J. (1973, City Police, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York, NY.

44. Sherman, L.W. (1978, The Quality of Police Education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

45. Sherman, L.W. (1990, "Police crackdowns: initial and residual deterrence, " in Tonry, M. and Morris, N. (Eds), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 1-48.

46. Sherman, L.W. (1992a, "Attacking crime: policing and crime control, " in Tonry & N. Morris (Eds), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 15, pp. 159-230, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

47. Sherman, L.W. (1992b, Policing Domestic Violence: Experiments and Dilemmas, Free Press, New York, NY.

48. Sherman, L.W. and Berk, R.A. (1984, "The specific deterrent effect of arrest for domestic assault, " American Sociological Review, Vol. 49, pp. 261-72.

49. Shichor, D. (1982, "An analysis of citations in introductory criminology textbooks: a research note, " Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 10, pp. 231-7.

50. Skogan, W.G. (1990, Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of Decay in America's Neighborhoods, Free Press, New York, NY.

51. Skolnick, J. (1975, Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in a Democratic Society, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, NY.

52. Skolnick, J. and Bayley, D.H. (1986, The New Blue Line: Police Innovations in Six American Cities, Free Press, New York, NY.

53. Stack, S. (1987, "Measuring the relative impacts of criminology and criminal justice journals: a research note", Justice Quarterly, Vol. 4, pp. 475-84.

54. Trojanowicz, R. and Bucqueroux, B. (1990, Community Policing: A Contemporary Perspective.Anderson, Cincinnati, CT.

55. Walker, S. (1977, A Critical History of Police Reform: The Emergence of Professionalism, D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA.

56. Walker, S. (1992, The Police in America: An Introduction, 2nd ed., McGraw- Hill, New York, NY.

57. Williams, F.P., III, McShane, M.D. and Wagoner, C.P. (1995, "Differences in assessments of relative prestige and utility of criminal justice and criminology journals, " American Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 19, pp. 301-24.

58. Wilson, J.Q. (1968, Varieties of Police Behavior: The Management of Law and Order in Eight Communities, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

59. Wilson, J.Q. and Kelling, G.L. (1982, "Broken windows: the police and neighborhood safety, " The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 249, pp. 29-38.

60. Wolfgang, M.E., Figlio, R.M. and Thornberry, T.P. (1978, Evaluating Criminology, Elsevier, New York, NY.

61. Wright, R.A. (1995, "The most-cited scholars in criminology: a comparison of textbooks and journals, " Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 23, pp. 303-11.

62. Wright, R.A. (forthcoming), "The most-cited scholars in criminology and criminal justice textbooks, 1989 to 1993, " The Justice Professional.

63. Wright, R.A. and Cohn, E.G. (1996, "The most-cited scholars in criminal justice textbooks, 1989 to 1993", Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 24, pp. 459-67.

64. Wright, R.A. and Friedrichs, D.O. (forthcoming), "The most-cited scholars and works in critical criminolog, " Journal of Criminal Justice Education.

65. Wright, R.A. and Rourke, J. (forthcoming), "The most-cited scholars and works in criminological theory, " in Adler, F. and Laufer, W.S. (Eds), Advances in Criminological Theory, Vol. 8, Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ.

66. Wright, R.A. and Sheridan, C. (forthcoming), "The most-cited scholars and works in women and crime publications, " Women and Criminal Justice.

67. Wright, R.A. and Soma, C. (1996, "The most-cited scholars in criminology textbooks, 1963 to 1968, 1976 to 1980, and 1989 to 1993, " Journal of Crime and Justice, Vol. 19, pp. 45-60.

Illustration

Caption: Table I; The 50 most-cited scholars in 370 police studies articles/ research notes; Table I; Element 2; Table II; The 36 most-cited works in 370 police studies articles/research notes; Table II; Element 4