Presented study explores the knowledge domain of psychological research published in 2020 and 2021. Metadata from 156,942 psychology papers available in Scopus were analyzed using citation analysis and bibliographic mapping techniques. Having in mind the ubiquity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the numerous ways it has affected people's lives, the fact that COVID-19-related papers represent only 2% to 7% of the total academic production in psychology may seem rather low. However, these papers have attracted much more attention from the public than non-COVID papers. They were also cited two to eight times more frequently, depending on the measure used, and account for 16% to 19% of total citations to psychology papers. Results show that early-stage researchers and those who had fewer articles in Scopus have benefited more from publishing COVID papers. They have managed to boost their average citation rates to the level of their colleagues who were much longer active and previously had higher citedness. Results indicate that the authors citing behavior largely follows the cumulative advantage pattern. Psychological research in general is mainly focused on mental health, anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is even more fostered due to the pandemic since some of these topics are often analyzed as typical emotional reactions to COVID-19. Other relevant issues are also very well covered, except for the question how scientific results are communicated to the public. The role of "hot" papers was elaborated from the perspective of research evaluation practice.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3.
Keywords: Bibliometric mapping; COVID-19; Citation analysis; Psychological research; Research evaluation.
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022.