Deep and narrow impact: introducing location filtered citation counting
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.
KeywordsCitation analysis Weighted citation analysis Location-filtered citation counting Research evaluation Bibliometrics Biomedical research fields
- 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.
- 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
- Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,36, 3–72.Google Scholar
- Bu, Y., Waltman, L, and Huang, Y. (2018). A multidimensional perspective on the citation impact of scientific publications. Retrieved April 2018 from.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.
- Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing—its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.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
- 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.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.Google Scholar
- 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).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.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
- 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. (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.Google Scholar