Jeremy C. Pope

3.8k total citations · 2 hit papers
36 papers, 2.0k citations indexed

About

Jeremy C. Pope is a scholar working on Political Science and International Relations, Communication and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Jeremy C. Pope has authored 36 papers receiving a total of 2.0k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 28 papers in Political Science and International Relations, 9 papers in Communication and 9 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Jeremy C. Pope's work include Electoral Systems and Political Participation (26 papers), Social Media and Politics (9 papers) and Political Influence and Corporate Strategies (8 papers). Jeremy C. Pope is often cited by papers focused on Electoral Systems and Political Participation (26 papers), Social Media and Politics (9 papers) and Political Influence and Corporate Strategies (8 papers). Jeremy C. Pope collaborates with scholars based in United States, Sweden and France. Jeremy C. Pope's co-authors include Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Abrams, Michael Barber, David Brady, Hahrie Han, Jonathan Woon, Christopher F. Karpowitz, Matthew Levendusky, Daniel M. Butler and Simon Jackman and has published in prestigious journals such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science and The Journal of Politics.

In The Last Decade

Jeremy C. Pope

34 papers receiving 1.8k citations

Hit Papers

Culture War? The Myth of ... 2004 2026 2011 2018 2004 2018 250 500 750

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Jeremy C. Pope United States 14 1.5k 926 567 392 370 36 2.0k
Thomas M. Carsey United States 16 1.8k 1.2× 1.0k 1.1× 641 1.1× 431 1.1× 399 1.1× 53 2.3k
Jan E. Leighley United States 24 2.2k 1.4× 1.4k 1.5× 873 1.5× 281 0.7× 538 1.5× 44 2.9k
Markus Wagner Austria 31 2.4k 1.6× 1.1k 1.1× 852 1.5× 456 1.2× 384 1.0× 83 3.0k
Jennifer Wolak United States 23 954 0.6× 803 0.9× 426 0.8× 156 0.4× 307 0.8× 57 1.6k
Peter Esaiasson Sweden 21 1.1k 0.7× 829 0.9× 392 0.7× 251 0.6× 203 0.5× 65 1.8k
Cees van der Eijk Netherlands 23 3.1k 2.0× 1.0k 1.1× 687 1.2× 611 1.6× 290 0.8× 86 3.6k
Ruth Dassonneville Canada 29 1.6k 1.0× 881 1.0× 505 0.9× 201 0.5× 349 0.9× 138 2.2k
Jonathan Polk Sweden 18 1.9k 1.2× 681 0.7× 349 0.6× 431 1.1× 239 0.6× 35 2.2k
Romain Lachat Switzerland 16 2.8k 1.8× 1.2k 1.3× 493 0.9× 424 1.1× 199 0.5× 40 3.2k
Richard Johnston Canada 21 1.4k 0.9× 1.2k 1.3× 468 0.8× 229 0.6× 233 0.6× 73 2.0k

Countries citing papers authored by Jeremy C. Pope

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Jeremy C. Pope's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Jeremy C. Pope with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jeremy C. Pope more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Jeremy C. Pope

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jeremy C. Pope. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Jeremy C. Pope. The network helps show where Jeremy C. Pope may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jeremy C. Pope

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jeremy C. Pope. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jeremy C. Pope based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Jeremy C. Pope. Jeremy C. Pope is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Argyle, Lisa P., et al.. (2024). The Ideological Asymmetry of White Identity. The Journal of Politics. 87(2). 795–800.
2.
Barber, Michael & Jeremy C. Pope. (2023). Does issue importance attenuate partisan cue-taking?. Political Science Research and Methods. 12(2). 435–443. 4 indexed citations
3.
Argyle, Lisa P. & Jeremy C. Pope. (2022). Does Political Participation Contribute to Polarization in the United States?. Public Opinion Quarterly. 86(3). 697–707. 5 indexed citations
4.
Barber, Michael & Jeremy C. Pope. (2022). Groups, Behaviors, and Issues as Cues of Partisan Attachments in the Public. American Politics Research. 50(5). 603–608. 3 indexed citations
5.
Pope, Jeremy C.. (2021). The Trump Era Legacy of Partisanism. The Forum. 19(1). 143–162. 2 indexed citations
6.
Pope, Jeremy C., et al.. (2021). Father Founders: Did Child Gender Affect Voting at the Constitutional Convention?. American Journal of Political Science. 65(3). 566–581. 3 indexed citations
7.
Karpowitz, Christopher F., et al.. (2020). What Leads Racially Resentful Voters to Choose Black Candidates?. The Journal of Politics. 83(1). 103–121. 14 indexed citations
8.
Barber, Michael & Jeremy C. Pope. (2019). Conservatism in the Era of Trump. Perspectives on Politics. 17(3). 719–736. 16 indexed citations
9.
Barber, Michael & Jeremy C. Pope. (2018). Who is Ideological? Measuring Ideological Consistency in the American Public. The Forum. 16(1). 97–122. 7 indexed citations
10.
Butler, Daniel M., Christopher F. Karpowitz, & Jeremy C. Pope. (2018). Who Gets the Credit? Legislative Responsiveness and Evaluations of Members, Parties, and the US Congress – ADDENDUM. Political Science Research and Methods. 6(4). 847–847. 1 indexed citations
11.
Butler, Daniel M., Christopher F. Karpowitz, & Jeremy C. Pope. (2016). Who Gets the Credit? Legislative Responsiveness and Evaluations of Members, Parties, and the US Congress. Political Science Research and Methods. 5(2). 351–366. 2 indexed citations
12.
Karpowitz, Christopher F. & Jeremy C. Pope. (2013). Who Caucuses? An Experimental Approach to Institutional Design and Electoral Participation. British Journal of Political Science. 45(2). 329–351. 7 indexed citations
13.
Pope, Jeremy C.. (2012). Voting vs. Thinking: Unified Partisan Voting Does Not Imply Unified Partisan Beliefs. The Forum. 10(3). 3 indexed citations
14.
Karpowitz, Christopher F., J. Quin Monson, Kelly D. Patterson, & Jeremy C. Pope. (2011). Tea Time in America? The Impact of the Tea Party Movement on the 2010 Midterm Elections. PS Political Science & Politics. 44(2). 303–309. 50 indexed citations
15.
Levendusky, Matthew & Jeremy C. Pope. (2010). Measuring Aggregate‐Level Ideological Heterogeneity. Legislative Studies Quarterly. 35(2). 259–282. 25 indexed citations
16.
Levendusky, Matthew, Jeremy C. Pope, & Simon Jackman. (2008). Measuring District-Level Partisanship with Implications for the Analysis of U.S. Elections. The Journal of Politics. 70(3). 736–753. 81 indexed citations
17.
Woon, Jonathan & Jeremy C. Pope. (2008). Made in Congress? Testing the Electoral Implications of Party Ideological Brand Names. The Journal of Politics. 70(3). 823–836. 64 indexed citations
18.
Brady, David, Hahrie Han, & Jeremy C. Pope. (2007). Primary Elections and Candidate Ideology: Out of Step with the Primary Electorate?. Legislative Studies Quarterly. 32(1). 79–105. 180 indexed citations
19.
Fiorina, Morris P., Samuel J. Abrams, & Jeremy C. Pope. (2003). The 2000 US Presidential Election: Can Retrospective Voting Be Saved?. British Journal of Political Science. 33(2). 163–187. 33 indexed citations
20.
Pope, Jeremy C.. (1982). Response to the Note by M.S.M Siddeek. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 40(3). 306–306. 1 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026