Scientific citation
Template:Short description Template:For Template:Refimprove
Template:Leadcite commentTemplate:Use dmy dates
Scientific citation is the process of systematically acknowledging sources from which information, data, ideas, or direct quotations are drawn in scholarly work.Sources in science are typically previously-published peer-reviewed journal articles, books, theses or dissertations, conference papers, and rarely private or public communications. Citations connect a researcher’s work with existing literature,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> ensuring transparency, academic integrity,<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> and safe outcomes such as in medical science.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Effective citation practices require clear, standardized mechanisms for referencing materials, particularly crucial as electronic publishing and online data repositories expand rapidly.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Scientists generate new knowledge by practicing the scientific method on the thoughts, ideas, and work that scientists did before them.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> By applying scholarly principles, scientists may report their findings which become part of the chain of knowledge.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Citations profoundly shape the structure of scientific knowledge by explicitly linking new research with existing academic literature.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> They define line of thought, give context to research within larger academic debates, and contribute to shared scholarly memory.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Accurate citation practices that knowledge is verifiable, essential for scientific advancement.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Like any complex system, there are problems, write large, with scientific citation. One issue is that rapid increase in digital data creates challenges in reliably verifying datasets due to a lack of standardized referencing practices, especially for online sets of data. Additionally, citation bias arises when researchers disproportionately reference studies based on reputation or ease of access rather than merit, potentially marginalizing equally valid but less visible research. Also, citations can sometimes unintentionally distort or misrepresent original data or contexts, either through oversight, misunderstanding, or selective interpretation, thereby complicating accurate knowledge transfer and verification.
Patent references
[edit]In patent law, the citation of previous works, or prior art, helps establish the uniqueness of the invention being described. The focus in this practice is to claim originality for commercial purposes, and so the author is motivated to avoid citing works that cast doubt on their originality. This does not appear to be "scientific" citation. Inventors and lawyers have a legal obligation to cite all relevant art; not doing so risks invalidating the patent.Template:Citation needed The patent examiner is obliged to list all further prior art found in searches.Template:Citation needed
Digital object identifier (DOI)
[edit]Research and development
[edit]Citation analysis
[edit]Citation frequency
[edit]Template:See also Modern scientists are sometimes judged by the number of times their work is cited by others—this is actually a key indicator of the relative importance of a work in science. Accordingly, individual scientists are motivated to have their own work cited early and often and as widely as possible, but all other scientists are motivated to eliminate unnecessary citations so as not to devalue this means of judgment.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> A formal citation index tracks which referred and reviewed papers have referred which other such papers. Baruch Lev and other advocates of accounting reform consider the number of times a patent is cited to be a significant metric of its quality, and thus of innovation.Template:Citation needed Reviews often replace citations to primary studies.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Citation-frequency is one indicator used in scientometrics.
Replication crisis
[edit]Some studies explore citations and citation-frequencies. Researchers found that papers in leading journals with findings that can not be replicated tend to be cited more than reproducible science. Results that are published unreproducibly – or not in a replicable sufficiently transparent way – are more likely to be wrong, may slow progress and, according to an author, "a simple way to check how often studies have been repeated, and whether or not the original findings are confirmed" is needed. The authors also put forward possible explanations for this state of affairs.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Progress and citation consolidation
[edit]
(more graphs)
Two meta-analyses reported that in a growing scientific field, citations disproportionately cite already well-cited papers, possibly slowing and inhibiting progress to some degree. They find that "structures fostering disruptive scholarship and focusing attention on novel ideas" could be important.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref name="atlantic">Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Other metascientists introduced the 'CD index' intended to characterize "how papers and patents change networks of citations in science and technology" and reported that it has declined, which they interpreted as "slowing rates of disruption". They proposed linking this to changes Template:Tooltip which they interpreted as "contemporary discovery and invention" being informed by "a narrower scope of existing knowledge". The overall number of papers has risen while the total of "highly disruptive" papers has not. The 1998 discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe has a CD index of 0. Their results also suggest scientists and inventors "may be struggling to keep up with the pace of knowledge expansion".<ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref name="atlantic"/><ref name="10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x">Template:Cite journal</ref>
IT systems
[edit]Research discovery
[edit]
Recommendation systems sometimes also use citations to find similar studies to the one the user is currently reading or that the user may be interested in and may find useful.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Better availability of integrable open citation information could be useful in addressing the "overwhelming amount of scientific literature".<ref name="metadata">Template:Cite arXiv</ref>
Q&A agents
[edit]Knowledge agents may use citations to find studies that are relevant to the user's query.
Wikipedia
[edit].png){kind=link}
There have been analyses of citations of science information on Wikipedia or of scientific citations on the site, e.g. enabling listing the most relevant or most-cited scientific journals and categories and dominant domains.<ref name="10.1371/journal.pone.0228713"/> Since 2015, the altmetrics platform Altmetric.com also shows citing English Wikipedia articles for a given study, later adding other language editions.<ref name="10.1371/journal.pone.0228713">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref> The Wikimedia platform under development Scholia also shows "Wikipedia mentions" of scientific works.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> A study suggests a citation on Wikipedia "could be considered a public parallel to scholarly citation".<ref name="Altmetrics">Template:Cite arXiv</ref> A scientific publication being "cited in a Wikipedia article is considered an indicator of some form of impact for this publication" and it may be possible to detect certain publications through changes to Wikipedia articles.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Wikimedia Research's Cite-o-Meter tool showed a league table of which academic publishers are most cited on Wikipedia<ref name="Altmetrics"/> as does a page by the "Academic Journals WikiProject".<ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref>Template:Circular referenceTemplate:Additional citation needed Research indicates a large share of academic citations on the platform are paywalled and hence inaccessible to many readers.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> "[citation needed]" is a tag added by Wikipedia editors to unsourced statements in articles requesting citations to be added.<ref name="Redi">Template:Cite book</ref> The phrase is reflective of the policies of verifiability and no original research on Wikipedia and has become a general Internet meme.<ref name=":0">Template:Cite book</ref>
Differentiation of semantic citation contexts
[edit]
The tool scite.ai tracks and links citations of papers as 'Supporting', 'Mentioning', or 'Contrasting' the study, differentiating between these contexts of citations to some degree which may be useful for evaluation/metrics and e.g. discovering studies or statements contrasting statements within a specific study.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="newbot"/>
Retractions
[edit]The Scite Reference Check bot is an extension of scite.ai that scans new article PDFs "for references to retracted papers, and posts both the citing and retracted papers on Twitter" and also "flags when new studies cite older ones that have issued corrections, errata, withdrawals, or expressions of concern".<ref name="newbot">Template:Cite web</ref> Studies have suggested as few as 4% of citations to retracted papers clearly recognize the retraction.<ref name="newbot"/> Research found "that authors tend to keep citing retracted papers long after they have been red flagged, although at a lower rate".<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]Template:Reflist Template:Notelist
References
[edit]Further reading
[edit]- Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science by Charles Bazerman [1]
- Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts by Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar
- The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn