Understanding the Field of Public Affairs through the Lens of Ranked Ph.D. Programs in the United States

The goal of this article is to understand the multidisciplinary field of public affairs. Based on data and text mining on the profiles and publications of all faculty members from a list of research-oriented U.S. public affairs programs, we describe the landscape of public affairs schools and scholars, identify 15 topics in public affairs research and discuss their trends of change between 1986 and 2015, and show the clustering and hiring networks of public affairs schools. Our results suggest a broader approach to understanding the field of public affairs than the public administration focus in the literature. Although public administration is highly visible in the field, which is evidenced by the journals most favored by public affair scholars, various specific policy areas (such as health, social, urban, environmental, global, and education policies) show strong representations based on our topical analysis of public affairs research.

[1]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[2]  J. H. Ward.  Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function , 1963 .

[3]  J. Legge,et al.  Measuring Productivity in U. S. Public Administration and Public Affairs Programs 1981-1985 , 1987 .

[4]  W. Bowen,et al.  Mainstream Public Administration Over Time: A Topical Content Analysis of the Public Administration Review , 1994 .

[5]  B. Uzzi,et al.  The paradox of critical mass for women in science. , 1994, Science.

[6]  B. Uzzi,et al.  The paradox of critical mass for women in science. , 1994, Science.

[7]  J. Douglas.  Faculty, Graduate Student, and Graduate Productivity in Public Administration and Public Affairs Programs, 1986-1993 , 1996 .

[8]  Zhiyong Lan,et al.  A Paradigmatic View of Contemporary Public Administration Research , 2000 .

[9]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[10]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[11]  V. Burris.  The Academic Caste System: Prestige Hierarchies in PhD Exchange Networks , 2004 .

[12]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[13]  H. Miller,et al.  Some Evidence of a Pluralistic Discipline: A Narrative Analysis of Public Administration Symposia , 2005 .

[14]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Steven G. Koven,et al.  Profiling Public Affairs Programs , 2008 .

[16]  Chong Wang,et al.  Reading Tea Leaves: How Humans Interpret Topic Models , 2009, NIPS.

[17]  Hugo Horta,et al.  Navel Gazing: Academic Inbreeding and Scientific Productivity , 2010, Manag. Sci..

[18]  Jeremiah P. Ostriker,et al.  A Data-Based Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States , 2011 .

[19]  Helen Shen.  Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap , 2013, Nature.

[20]  David McG. Squire,et al.  Deconstructing Bricolage: Interactive Online Analysis of Compiled Texts with Factotum , 2015, Digit. Humanit. Q..

[21]  Cameron Blevins,et al.  Jane, John ... Leslie? A Historical Method for Algorithmic Gender Prediction , 2015, Digit. Humanit. Q..

[22]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Examining the Evolution of the Field of Public Administration through a Bibliometric Analysis of Public Administration Review , 2017 .

[23]  Jordan L. Boyd-Graber,et al.  Measuring discursive influence across scholarship , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Kang Zhao,et al.  The more multidisciplinary the better? - The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions , 2018, J. Informetrics.