Citation Analysis

Testing Mechanisms
Soonwoo Kwon, Jonathan Roth
https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.11739
142
Citation mentions
52
Cited references
12
Sections
8,045
Words (approx)

References by Citation Intensity

Ordered by composite index (descending). Higher values indicate more intensive citation.

# Reference Year Mentions Breadth Sec. Wtd Share Composite Main %
1 Bursztyn, González and Yanagizawa-Drott 2020 22 5 36.5 0.155 0.952 86%
2 Kitagawa 2015 5 4 6.5 0.035 0.928 80%
3 Cox and Shi 2022 4 3 6.0 0.028 0.928 100%
4 Baranov, Bhalotra, Biroli and Maselko 2020 31 5 46.5 0.218 0.892 71%
5 Andrews, Roth and Pakes (self) 2023 3 3 5.0 0.021 0.843 100%
6 Fang, Santos, Shaikh and Torgovitsky 2023 3 3 5.0 0.021 0.843 100%
7 Kédagni and Mourifié 2020 3 2 4.0 0.021 0.737 100%
8 Sun 2023 3 2 5.0 0.021 0.737 100%
9 Andrews and Shi 2013 6 3 6.0 0.042 0.693 33%
10 Mourifié and Wan 2017 6 2 4.0 0.042 0.606 33%
11 Li, Sheng and Yu 2025 3 1 6.0 0.021 0.585 100%
12 Huber 2019 2 1 2.0 0.014 0.511 100%
13 Balke and Pearl 1997 2 1 2.0 0.014 0.511 100%
14 Huber and Mellace 2015 2 1 2.0 0.014 0.511 100%
15 Wang, Robins and Richardson 2017 2 1 2.0 0.014 0.511 100%
16 Frangakis and Rubin 2002 2 2 1.5 0.014 0.511 50%
17 Zhang and Rubin 2003 2 2 1.5 0.014 0.511 50%
18 Lee 2009 2 2 1.5 0.014 0.511 50%
19 Flores and Flores-Lagunes 2010 2 2 1.5 0.014 0.511 50%
20 Imbens and Angrist 1994 5 2 4.0 0.035 0.511 20%
21 Ludwig, Kling and Mullainathan 2011 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
22 Athey, Chetty, Imbens and Kang 2024 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
23 VanderWeele 2016 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
24 Robins and Greenland 1992 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
25 Pearl 2001 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
26 Imai, Keele and Yamamoto 2010 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
27 Frölich and Huber 2017 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
28 Deuchert, Huber and Schelker 2019 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
29 Schenk 2023 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
30 Miles 2023 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
31 Angrist, Pathak and Zarate 2023 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
32 Angrist and Hull 2023 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
33 Huber, Laffers and Mellace 2017 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
34 Mogstad, Torgovitsky and Walters 2024 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
35 Ji, Lei and Spector 2024 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
36 Yap 2025 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
37 Charnes and Cooper 1962 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
38 Shapiro 1991 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
39 Fang and Santos 2019 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
40 Cho and Russell 2024 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
41 Abadie 2003 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
42 Athey and Imbens 2006 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
43 Callaway and Li 2019 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
44 Roth and Sant'Anna (self) 2023 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
45 Carr and Kitagawa 2023 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
46 Farbmacher, Guber and Klaassen 2022 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
47 D’Haultfœuille, Hoderlein and Sasaki 2024 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
48 Villani 2009 1 1 0.5 0.007 0.087 0%
49 VanderWeele 2012 1 1 0.5 0.007 0.087 0%
50 Chernozhukov, Lee and Rosen 2013 1 1 0.5 0.007 0.087 0%
51 Armstrong 2014 1 1 0.5 0.007 0.087 0%
52 Chetverikov 2018 1 1 0.5 0.007 0.087 0%
Measures: Mentions = total in-text citations; Breadth = distinct sections; Sec. Wtd = section-weighted count (body ×2, lit review/appendix ×0.5); Share = mentions / total citations in paper; Composite = geometric mean of normalised count, breadth, and main-text ratio; Main % = fraction of mentions in main text (excl. appendix). (self) = self-citation.