What maximizes productivity and impact in political science research?

What contributes toward academic productivity and impact in political science research publications? To consider this issue, Part I of this article describes the core concepts and their operationalization, using the h-index. The study theorizes that variations in this measure may plausibly be influenced by personal characteristics (like gender, career longevity, and formal qualifications), working conditions (academic rank, type of department, and job security), as well as subjective role perceptions (exemplified by the perceived importance of scholarly research or teaching). Part II sets out new evidence used for exploring these issues, drawing upon the ECPR-IPSA World of Political Science survey. This study gathered information from 2446 political scientists in 102 countries around the globe. Part III presents the distribution and analysis of the results, as well as several robustness tests. Part IV summarizes the key findings and considers their broader implications. In general, several personal characteristics and structural working conditions prove significant predictors of h-index scores, whereas motivational goals and role perceptions add little, if anything, to the models. Thus, who you are and where you work seems to predict productivity and impact more than career ambitions and social psychological orientations toward academic work.