'Counting the citations': what happened in 2013?

Navel-gazing was never easier. Google Scholar enables us to keep a close watch on our own (and other people's) publication activities. We have instant access to our citation count, our h-index, our i10-index, our i-100 index- we see a life in publication scrolling before us. And it reveals some interesting things. I have been publishing stuff since 1962 but for many many years had no citation impact at all. I used to wrestle with the printed volumes of the Science Citation Index before Google Scholar came along and made our lives more interesting, and better measured. My Google Scholar record begins in 1982 (as I assume does everyone elses) and the columns in the unrolling histogram are very short; nothing happens until very recently. Ironically it is not until I reach retiring age (in 2001) that my scholarly endeavors appear to have any significant impact. All the good stuff happens when my scholarly activity is supposed to have ceased.

There is a slow increase in column height after 2001 and a slow upward trend is detected, and then, at about 2013 there is a proper increase. Something happens at around 2013 that causes a citation increase. Now I do not think that this reflects me becoming more productive- I think it possibly reflects a general upturn in interest in loess and related topics.  Since I only write on loess (by & large) it could be that the movements in my personal histogram reflect a general increase in interest in loess scholarship. Since I am so one-eyed in my interests and publications this could be a possibility. Is there anyone else who publishes largely on loess whose citation histogram could be consulted- for comparative purposes.

Here is Prof.Dr. Slobodan Markovic of the University of Novi Sad- the most noted loess scholar in Europe. Does his histogram suggest an increase in loess interest (is,in fact, he largely responsible for this increase in loess interest)?
The overall shape of the IS and SM histograms is similar; 2013 is a time of action; and in each case a large column for 2018. Papers on loess were published in 2018. Is there an explanation for this publishing pattern in the 21st Century?  This blog starts with two sets of citation data; more may be added..

Part 2; Two more sets of data found; two more loess investigators to consider. Q: does the shape of the individual histogram reflect activity in the field in general? Or vice-versa?  Add citation charts for Drs Tom Stevens of the University of Uppsala and Ulrich Hambach of Bayreuth University- two important loess investigators; was 2018 good for them?



Dr Tom Stevens:

Dr Ulrich Hambach

The UH profile shows the 2013 leap and the 2018 highpoint very nicely; why did we all do so well in 2018?