Traditionally, AL has been on the edge of the humanities and the social sciences, leaning more toward the latter than the former in recent times. This means that many of the developments in those areas have had an impact on AL. One fairly recent one is the role of publications and citations. Citations have, despite the warnings of people like Eugene Garﬁeld, the godfather of the citation index, become all-important and can make or break an academic career. Citation analysis is a new development in the 30 years covered in this
study. Though Eugene Garﬁeld’s Institute for Scientiﬁc Information (ISI) was established in 1960, the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) started only in 1975, and there are very few publications in the early 1980s attracting larger numbers of citations, so for the earlier decade citations are clearly not that relevant to measure impact. This chapter is diﬀerent from the other ones, as it is not based on my
participants’ views, but on their publications. I decided to add this chapter because analyses of citations provide a picture of the ﬁeld that is hard to obtain through other data. It helps to show whether the people that are seen as leaders are also the ones cited most and it allows to a certain extent a comparison between disciplines. In this chapter, I will discuss the ﬁndings of a citation analysis of the informants in this study, how citations and impact scores are related to scores on leadership, and what the impact is of the most important AL journals. The data for this analysis have mainly been gathered in January and February
2014, so there will be publications from after 2010. There is no way to retrospectively assess the citation scores on December 31, 2009. Even over a short period of time citation scores may change substantially, so the data used here are a snapshot of the ﬁeld at one moment in time. Subsequent data collection and analysis will have to be done to assess the stability of the present ﬁndings.