Interesting article and methodology. I wish you could play with the ranking features to see how the ranking evolves.

I didn't know Kevin Munger. You could definitely seen regarding his field and publications why he would weight 25% of the score to the methodology citations though. Which is partly why his index is very flawed, seeing how qualitative endeavors would be squashed (Qualitative methodologies being very dependant on context). Maybe it does bridge a gap between disciplines that are quantitatively oriented ; STEM and social sciences. The humanities would be nowhere though.

It does beg the question of rankings to begin with ... A dean should know better than to statsmaxx (note the irony).

I thought it was fairly obvious the author was trying to point out the issue with quantitative rankings by setting up the stats to juice his score. It would be fun to play with the stats and figure out how to make yourself come out on top though. Unfortunately I'm not in political science, so it's not much good to me.