Citation culture: Citing authors behaviour vs trust in research results

The importance of correct citation for the development and deepening of scholarly knowledge is evident. At the same time, considering citation in assessing the quality level of a particular paper or journal can be treated differently due to citation practices, thus requiring a systematic analysis, and tracking of their development. The purpose of this article is to present the architecture of the citation landscape current state and comment on steps to avoid common pitfalls in the citation process. The authors have analyzed the most significant foreign studies on the topic, highlighted the main key aspects of the modern citation culture and new trends that can change the citation practice. A typology of citation is offered, the most prominent theories of citing authors behavior are commented, strategies of citing authors behavior and factors that determine the characteristics of citation are described, parameters of high-quality citation are analyzed, and recommendations for the implementation of successful strategies for citing authors behavior are given. The authors have also highlighted new trends in the context of citation (review of the citation context, the phenomenon of unwanted citation) that can significantly transform the citation practice. Understanding the landscape of modern citation culture by citing authors is fundamentally capable of optimizing citation standards, achieving maximum transparency and validity of the scholarly communication context.

1. Todd P., Yeo D. C. J., Li D., Ladle R.J. Citing practices in ecology: Сan we believe our own words? Oikos. 2007;116(9):1599–1601. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.15992.x

2. Cronin B. The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London, England: Taylor Graham; 1984.

3. Waltman L., van Eck N.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Raan A. F. J. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics. 2011;5(1):37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.08.001

4. Waltman L. A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics. 2016;10(2):365–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007

5. Tahamtan I., Bornmann L. Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature. Journal of Informetrics. 2018;12(1):203–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.002

6. Кириллова О.В., Попова Н.Г., Тихонова Е.В. Публикация статьи в авторитетном журнале: рекомендации для авторов [Ассоциация научных редакторов и издателей]. М.; 2023 (в печати).

7. Merton R.K. The Matthew effect in science II: cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis. 1988;79(4):606–623. https://doi.org/10.1086/354848

8. Knorr-Cetina K. Merton sociology of science: the first and the last sociology of science. Contemporary Sociology. 1991;20(4):522–526. https://doi.org/10.2307/2071782

9. Abramo G., D’Angelo C.A. A farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators. Journal of Informetrics. 2016;10(2):646–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.006

10. Moed H.F., Garfield E. In basic science the percentage of ‘authoritative’ references decreases as bibliographies become shorter. Scientometrics. 2004;60(3):295–303. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034375.39385.84

11. Flier J.S. Credit and Priority in Scientific Discovery: A Scientist’s Perspective. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 2019;62(2):189–215. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2019.0010

12. Cozzens S.E. What do citations count? The rhetoric-first model. Scientometrics. 1989;15(5-6):437–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017064

13. Aksnes D.W., Langfeldt L., Wouters P. Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories. SAGE Open. 2019;9(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829575

14. White H.D. Reward, persuasion, and the Sokal Hoax: a study in citation identities. Scientometrics. 2004;60(1):93–120. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027313.91401.9b

15. Baldi S. Normative versus social constructivist processes in the allocation of citations: a network-analytic model. American Sociological Review. 1998;63(6):829–846. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657504

16. Small H. On the shoulders of Robert Merton: towards a normative theory of citation. Scientometrics. 2004;60(1):71–79. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027310.68393.bc

17. Garfield E. Random thoughts on citationology. Its theory and practice – Comments on theories of citation? Scientometrics. 1998;43(1):69–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458396

18. Dougherty M.R., Horne Z. Citation counts and journal impact factors do not capture some indicators of research quality in the behavioural and brain sciences. Royal Society Open Science. 2022;9(8):220–334. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220334

19. Cano V. Citation behavior: classification, utility, and location. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1989;40(4):284–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198907)40:43.0.CO;2-Z

20. Mingers J., Leydesdorff L. A review of theory and practice in scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research. 2015;246(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002

21. Zhang C., Liu L., Wang Y. Characterizing references from different disciplines: A perspective of citation content analysis. Journal of Informetrics. 2021;15(2):101–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101134

22. Waltman L., Schreiber M. On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2013;64(2):372–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22775

23. Bornmann L., Daniel H. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation. 2008;64(1):45–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810844150

24. Peters H.P., Raan A.F. On Determinants of Citation Scores: A Case Study in Chemical Engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1994;45(1):39–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199401)45:1%3C39::AID-ASI5%3E3.0.CO;2-Q

25. Ayres I., Vars F.E. Determinants of Citations to Articles in Elite Law Reviews. The Journal of Legal Studies. 2000;29(1):427–450. https://doi.org/10.1086/468081

26. Yue W., Wilson С., Rousseau R. The immediacy index and the journal impact factor: Two highly correlated derived measures. The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science. 2004;28(1):33–48.

27. Boyack K., Klavans R., Börner K. Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics. 2005;64(3):351–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0255-6

28. Yaminfirooz M., Ardali F.R. Identifying the Factors Affecting Papers’ Citability in the Field of Medicine: an Evidence-based Approach Using 200 Highly and Lowly-cited Papers. Acta Informatica Medica. 2018;26(1):10–14. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2018.26.10-14

29. He Z.-L. International collaboration does not have greater epistemic authority. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 2009;60(10):2151–2164. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21150

30. Beaver D.B. Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics. 2004;60(3):399–408. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034382.85360.cd

31. Boyack K.W., Klavans R. Predicting the importance of current papers. In: Ingwersen P., Larsen В.B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Stockholm, Sweden: Karolinska University Press; 2005, рp. 335–342.

32. Corbyn Z. An easy way to boost a paper’s citations. Nature. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1038/news.2010.406

33. Raitskaya L., Tikhonova E. Seven Deadly Sins: Culture’s Effect on Scholarly Editing and Publishing. Journal of Language and Education. 2020;6(3):167–172. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2020.11205

34. Tikhonova E., Raitskaya L. Citations and References: Guidelines on Literature Practices. Journal of Language and Education. 2022;8(3):5–10. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.15960

35. Özkent Y. Social media usage to share information in communication journals: An analysis of social media activity and article citations. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(2):e0263725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263725

36. Stack S. Gender, children and research productivity. Research in Higher Education. 2004;45(8):891–920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-5953-z

37. Sandström U., Van den Besselaar P. Performance of Research Teams: results from 107 European groups. In: Proceedings 17th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics. Italy: Sapienza University of Rome; 2019, pp. 2240–2251.

38. Small H., Boyack K.W., Klavans R. Citations and certainty: a new interpretation of citation counts. Scientometrics. 2019;118(2):1079–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03016-z

39. Piwowar H., Priem J., Larivière V., Alperin J., Matthias L., Norlander B., Farley A., West J., Haustein S. The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ. 2017;6:e4375. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375

40. Moravcsik M.J., Murugesan P. Some Results on the Function and Quality of Citations. Social Studies of Science. 1975;5(1):86–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277500500106

41. Stevens M. R., Park K., Tian G., Kim K., Ewing R. Why Do Some Articles in Planning Journals Get Cited More than Others? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2022;42(3):442–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X19827083

42. Wouters P.F. The citation culture. Thesis. In: UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) of the University of Amsterdam [Fully internal]; 1999. URL: https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/3164289/8218_thesis.pdf

43. Garfield E. Can citation indexing be automated? Essays of an Information Scientist. 1962;73(1):84–90.

44. Krampen G., Montada L. Wissenschaftsforschung in der Psychologie (Science Research in Psychology). Germany: Hogrefe, Göttingen; 2002. 95 р.

45. Frost C. O. The literature of online public access catalogues, 1980–85 – an analysis of citation patterns. Library Resources & Technical Services. 1989;33(4):344–357.

46. Corbyn Z. To be the best, cite the best. Nature. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1038/news.2010.539

47. Hanney S., Grant J., Jones T., Buxton M. Categorising citations to trace research impact. In: Ingwersen P., Larsen В.B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Stockholm, Sweden: Karolinska University Press; 2005, рp. 656–657.

48. Lerner N., Oddis K. The Social Lives of Citations: How and Why “Writing Center Journal” Authors Cite Sources. The Writing Center Journal. 2017;36(2):235–262. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44594857

49. White M.D., Wang P.L. A qualitative study of citing behavior: contributions, criteria, and metalevel documentation concerns. Library Quarterly. 1997;67(2):122–154. https://doi.org/10.1086/629929

50. Avanzini F., Bertele V., Pistotti V., Mannucci P.M., Garattini S. Solicited self-referencing undermines the credibility of researchers and journals. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2012;10(3):481–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04601.x

51. Small H. Citation context analysis. Progress in communication sciences. 1982;3:287–310.

52. Anderson M.H., Lemken R.K. Citation Context Analysis as a Method for Conducting Rigorous and Impactful Literature Reviews. Organizational Research Methods. 2023;26(1):77–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120969905

53. Todd P.A., Ladle R.J. Hidden dangers of a ‘citation culture’. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. 2008;8(1):3–16. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep0009

54. Harzing A. Are our referencing errors undermining our scholarship and credibility? The case of expatriate failure rates. Journal of Organisational Behaviour. 2002;23(1):127–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.125

55. Gavras H. Inappropriate attribution: The ‘lazy author’ syndrome. American Journal of Hypertension. 2002;15(9):831. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-7061(02)02989-8

56. Ball P. Paper trail reveals references go unread by citing authors. Nature. 2002;420(6916):594. https://doi.org/10.1038/420594a

57. Harzing A., Wal R.V. Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. 2008;8(1):61–73. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00076

58. Patience G.S., Patience C.A., Blais B., Bertrand F. Citation analysis of scientific categories. Heliyon. 2017;3(5):e00300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00300

59. Baccini A., De Nicolao G., Petrovich E. Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(9):e0221212. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221212

60. Teixeira da Silva J.A., Vuong Q.H. The right to refuse unwanted citations: rethinking the culture of science around the citation. Scientometrics. 2021;126(6):5355–5360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03960-9

61. Vuong Q.-H. The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies. Nature Human Behaviour. 2018;2(1):5–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0281-4

62. Anderson M. H., Lemken R. K. An empirical assessment of the influence of March and Simon’s Organizations: The realized contribution and unfulfilled promise of a masterpiece. Journal of Management Studies. 2019;56(8):1537–1569. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12527

63. Duyx B., Urlings M. J. E., Swaen G. M. H., Bouter L.M., Zeegers M.P. Scientific citations favor positive results: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2017;88:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.002

64. Paris G., De Leo G., Menozzi P., Gatto M. Region-based citation bias in science. Nature. 1998;396(6708):210–210. https://doi.org/10.1038/24249

65. Teixeira da Silva J.A. Snub publishing: Evidence from the Anthurium literature. Publishing Research Quarterly. 2014;30(1): 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-014-9355-6

66. Dworkin J.D., Linn K.A., Teich E.G., Zurn P., Shinohara R.T., Bassett D.S. The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists. Nature Neuroscience. 2020;23(8):918–926. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-0658-y

67. Ekmekci P.E. An increasing problem in publication ethics: Publication bias and editors’ role in avoiding it. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. 2017;20(2):171–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-017-9767-0

68. Doğan G., Şencan İ, Tonta Y. Does dirty data affect google scholar citations? Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2016;53(1):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.164505301098