Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Deep and narrow impact: introducing location filtered citation counting

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study tests a citation counting method that filters out citations in the introductory and backgrounds sections and then weighs the remaining citations by their in-text frequency. The dataset used comprises articles on bibliometrics available in full text in PubMed Central. This method was inspired by findings from previous studies that in-text frequency indicates importance of citations and citations in Methodology, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions sections tend to be more important to a citing article. We found that this method makes a large difference in author ranking as suggested by a 0.4 correlation between ranking by this method and that by traditional citation counting. Generally, this method has ranked authors concerning biomedical issues higher and those focused on bibliometrics or science communication issues lower compared to traditional citation counting. This rank change pattern suggests that this method appears to have made essential citations stand out more, i.e., citations that studies concerning biomedicine are expected to draw on more heavily. This method has also ranked guidelines or theoretical or methodological frameworks for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, knowledge translation, and scoping studies much higher, indicating that Bibliometrics has been mostly employed in these types of studies in biomedical fields. Unfortunately, citation network analysis doesn’t seem to have been employed much as indicated by key authors representing science mapping being ranked much lower by this method although it has been shown to be informative for these types of studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al Jaber, A.O., & Elayyan, H.O. (2018). Toward quality assurance and excellence in higher education. Gistrup: River Publishers. p. 284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertin, M., & Atanassova, I. (2018). InTeReC: In-text reference corpus for applying natural language processing to bibliometrics. Retrieved April 18, 2019 from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2080/paper6.pdf.

  • Bertin, M., Atanassova, I., Gingras, Y., & Lariviere, V. (2016). The invariant distribution of references in scientific articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,67(1), 164–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertram, S. (1972). Citations counts. In A. Pitemick (Ed.), Proceedings of the fourth annual meeting of the American society for information science, Western Canada chapter (pp. 61–67). Vancouver: University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonzi, S. (1982). Characteristics of a literature as predictors of relatedness between cited and citing works. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,33, 208–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,36, 3–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). What co-citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation,64, 45–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. W., Small, H., & Klavans, R. (2013). Improving the accuracy of co-citation clustering using full text. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,64(9), 1759–1767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. W., Van Eck, N. J., Colavizzac, G., & Waltman, L. (2018). Characterizing in-text citations in scientific articles: A large-scale analysis. Journal of Informetrics.,12(1), 59–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, T. A. (1985). Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,36(4), 223–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, T. A. (1986). Evidence of complex citer motivations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,37(1), 34–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bu, Y., Waltman, L, and Huang, Y. (2018). A multidimensional perspective on the citation impact of scientific publications. Retrieved April 2018 from.

  • Cano, V. (1989). Citation behavior—classification, utility, and location. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,40, 284–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case, D. O., & Higgins, G. M. (2000). How can we investigate citation behavior? A study of reasons for citing literature in communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,51(7), 635–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chubin, D. E., & Moitra, S. D. (1975). Content analysis of references: Adjunct or alternative to citation counting? Social Studies of Science,5(4), 423–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., & Cronin, B. (2011). Popular and/or prestigious? Measures of scholarly esteem. Information Processing and Management,47, 80–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Liu, X., Guo, C., & Cronin, B. (2013). The distribution of references across texts: Some implications for citation analysis. Journal of Informetrics,7(3), 583–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doumont, J. (Ed.). (2010). English communication for scientists. Cambridge: NPG Education. Retrieved September 22, 2016, from http://www.nature.com/scitable/ebooks/english-communication-for-scientists-14053993.

  • Funk, R. J., & Owen-Smith, J. A. (2017). Dynamic network measure of technological change. Management Science,63, 791–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing—its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanney, S., Frame, I., Grant, J., Buxton, M., Young, T., & Lewison, G. (2005). Using categorizations of citations when assessing the outcomes of health research. Scientometrics,65, 357–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herlach, G. (1978). Can retrieval of information from citation indexes be simplified? Multiple mention of a reference as a characteristic of the link between cited and citing article. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,29(6), 308–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hou, W., Li, M., & Niu, D. (2011). Counting citations in texts rather than reference lists to improve the accuracy of assessing scientific contribution. BioEssays,33, 724–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, T.-M., & Chen, K.-H. (2018). How authors cite references? A study of characteristics of in-text citations. ASIST Proceedings,55(1), 179–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Z., Lin, G., Sun, T., & Hou, H. (2017). Understanding multiply mentioned references. Journal of Informetrics,11(4), 948–958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, Y. K., Song, M., & Ding, Y. (2014). Content-based author co-citation analysis. Journal of Informetrics,8(1), 197–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. (1993). The complexities of citation practice: A review of citation studies. Journal of Documentation,49, 370–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCain, K. W., & Turner, K. (1989). Citation context analysis and aging patterns of journal articles in Molecular-Genetics. Scientometrics,17, 127–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, M. J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science,5(1), 86–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F. (1976). Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity. Washington, DC: Computer Horizons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otto, W., Ghavimi, B., Mayr, P., Piryani, R. & Singh, V.K. (2019). Highly cited references in PLOS ONE and their in-text usage over time. Retrieved April 18, 2019 from ArXiv.org.

  • Pak, C., Yu, G., & Wang, W. (2018). A study on the citation situation within the citing paper: Citation distribution of references according to mention frequency. Scientometrics,114(3), 905–918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2627-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Tolliver, D., Gray, M., & Gupta, S. K. S. (1995). Author judgements about works they cite: Three studies from psychology journals. Social Studies of Science,25(3), 477–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (1982). Citation context analysis. In B. J. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences, 3 (pp. 287–310). Norwood: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strotmann, A., & Zhao, D. (2015). An 80/20 data quality law for professional scientometrics? In Proceedings of the 15th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, June 30–July 3, 2015, Istanbul, Turkey.

  • Tabatabaei, N. (2013). Contribution of information science to other disciplines as reflected in citation contexts of highly cited JASIST papers. Montreal. (McGill University P.hD. dissertation).

  • Tang, R., & Safer, M. A. (2008). Author-rated importance of cited references in biology and psychology publications. Journal of Documentation,64, 246–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., & Tidhar, D. (2006). Automatic classification of citation function. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 103–110). Stroudsburg.

  • Thelwall, M. (2019a). Should citations be counted separately from each originating section? Journal of Informetrics,13, 658–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2019b). The rhetorical structure of science? A multidisciplinary analysis of article headings. Journal of Informetrics.,13(2), 555–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinkler, P. (1987). A quasi-quantitative citation model. Scientometrics,12(1), 47–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voos, H., & Dagaev, K. S. (1976). Are all citations equal? Or Did we op. cit. your idem? Journal of Academic Librarianship,1, 20–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D. (1990). Author co-citation analysis: Overview and defense. In C. L. Borgman (Ed.), Scholarly communication and bibliometrics (Vol. 84, p. 106). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,49, 327–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., & Wang, P. L. (1997). A qualitative study of citing behavior: contributions, criteria, and meta-level documentation concerns. Library Quarterly,67, 122–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L. F., Wang, D. S., & Evans, J. A. (2019). Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature,566, 378–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., Cappello, A., & Johnston, L. (2017). Functions of uni-and multi-citations: Implications for weighted citation analysis. Journal of Data and Information Science,2(1), 51–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008a). Information Science during the first decade of the Web: An enriched author co-citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,59(6), 916–937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008b). Evolution of research activities and intellectual influences in Information Science 1996–2005: Introducing author bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,59(13), 2070–2086.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2011). Intellectual structure of Stem Cell research: A comprehensive author co-citation analysis of a highly collaborative and multidisciplinary field. Scientometrics,87(1), 115–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2014). The knowledge base and research front of Information science 2006–2010: An author co-citation and bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,65(5), 996–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2015a). Analysis and visualization of citation networks. In Gary Marchionini (Ed.), Synthesis lectures on information concepts, retrieval, and services. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool Publishers. https://doi.org/10.2200/s00624ed1v01y201501icr039.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D. & Strotmann, A. (2015b). Re-citation analysis: Promising for research evaluation, knowledge network analysis, knowledge representation and information retrieval? In Proceedings of the 15th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, June 30–July 3, 2015, Istanbul, Turkey.

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2016). Dimensions and uncertainties of author citation rankings: Lessons learned from frequency-weighted in-text citation counting. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,67(3), 628–671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., Turney, P., Lemire, D., & Vellino, A. (2015). Measuring academic influence: Not all citations are equal. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(2), 408–427.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2J4, Canada

    Dangzhi Zhao

  2. ScienceXplore, F.-G.-Keller-Str. 10, 01814, Bad Schandau, Germany

    Andreas Strotmann

Authors
  1. Dangzhi Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Strotmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dangzhi Zhao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, D., Strotmann, A. Deep and narrow impact: introducing location filtered citation counting. Scientometrics 122, 503–517 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03280-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03280-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy