Abstract
The paper authored by Zong et al. (Scientometrics, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03108-w) claims that equipping articles with a video abstract provides them a citation advantage. Here I argue that the study above does not consider two potential confounding factors, namely, the role played by self-citations as well as by the self-selection bias. Author self-citations push the citation premium of the articles analyzed in the study referenced above, thus the net effect of video abstracts is lower than expected. What is more, articles with a video abstract seem to associate with higher citations in comparison to their counterparts without the video companion due to the self-selection bias. Namely, authors may be prone to include a video abstract in the articles they believe are of outstanding quality and best representative of their research activities. All this suggests that the alleged citation advantage of video abstracts is, at least, of doubtful occurrence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Archambault, É., & Larivière, V. (2009). History of the journal impact factor: Contingencies and consequences. Scientometrics,79(3), 635–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2036-x.
Bornmann, L. (2015). Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics,103(3), 1123–1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1565-y.
Brody, T., Harnad, S., & Carr, L. (2006). Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,57(8), 1060–1072. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20373.
Buela-Casal, G., & Zych, I. (2012). What do the scientists think about the impact factor? Scientometrics,92(2), 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0676-y.
Craig, I., Plume, A., McVeigh, M., Pringle, J., & Amin, M. (2007). Do open access articles have greater citation impact? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics,1(3), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.04.001.
De Rond, M., & Miller, A. N. (2005). Publish or Perish: Bane or boon of academic life? Journal of Management Inquiry,14(4), 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492605276850.
Erdt, M., Nagarajan, A., Sin, S. C. J., & Theng, Y. L. (2016). Altmetrics: An analysis of the state-of-the-art in measuring research impact on social media. Scientometrics,109(2), 1117–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2077-0.
Fanelli, D. (2010). Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS ONE,5(4), e10271. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010271.
Fanelli, D. (2012). Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries. Scientometrics,90(3), 891–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7.
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016a). The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus. Journal of Informetrics,10(1), 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.006.
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016b). Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of Informetrics,10(4), 933–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.07.003.
Gad-el-Hak, M. (2004). Publish or perish—An Ailing enterprise? Physics Today,57(3), 61–62. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1712503.
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science,122(3159), 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108.
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation: Journals can be ranked by frequency and impact of citations for science policy studies. Science,178(4060), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.178.4060.471.
Garfield, E. (1996). What is the primordial reference for the phrase “publish or perish”? Scientist,10(12), 11.
Gaulé, P., & Maystre, N. (2011). Getting cited: Does open access help? Research Policy,40(10), 1332–1338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.025.
Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics,53(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014848323806.
Hartley, J. (2016). What’s new in abstracts of science articles. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA,104(3), 235–236. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.011.
Kurtz, M. J., & Bollen, J. (2010). Usage bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,44(1), 1–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2010.1440440108.
Meester, W. J. N., Colledge, L., & Dyas, E. E. (2016). A response to “The museum of errors, horrors in Scopus” by Franceschini et al. Journal of Informetrics,10(2), 569–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.011.
Monastersky, R. (2005). The number that’s devouring science. The Chronicle of Higher Education,52(8), A12–A13.
Nicholas, D., Herman, E., Jamali, H. R., Bravo, B. R., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Dobrowolski, T., et al. (2015). New ways of building, showcasing, and measuring scholarly reputation. Learned Publishing,28(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150303.
Opthof, T. (1997). Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovascular Research,33(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-6363(96)00215-5.
Ottaviani, J. (2016). The post-embargo open access citation advantage: It exists (probably), it’s modest (usually), and the rich get richer (of course). PLoS ONE,11(8), e0159614. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159614.
Priem, J., Groth, P., & Taraborelli, D. (2012). The altmetrics collection. PLoS ONE,7(11), e48753. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048753.
Priem, J., & Hemminger, B. H. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday,15(7), 233. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874.
Rees, T., Lê, S., Prevost, L., & Smith, S. (2015). Video abstracts: Do the metrics stack up? In 11th annual meeting of ISMPP, Arlington, VA, USA.
Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ,314(7079), 497. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497.
Spicer, S. (2014). Exploring video abstracts in science journals: An overview and case study. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication,2(2), eP1110. https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1110.
Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics,98(2), 1131–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1117-2.
Thelwall, M. (2018). Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts. Scientometrics,115(3), 1231–1240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2715-9.
Zong, Q., Xie, Y., Tuo, R., Huang, J., & Yang, Y. (2019). The impact of video abstract on citation counts: Evidence from a retrospective cohort study of New Journal of Physics. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03108-w.
Zupanc, G. K. H. (2014). Impact beyond the impact factor. Journal of Comparative Physiology A,200(2), 113–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-013-0863-1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Copiello, S. The alleged citation advantage of video abstracts may be a matter of self-citations and self-selection bias. Comment on “The impact of video abstract on citation counts” by Zong et al.. Scientometrics 122, 751–757 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03173-1
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03173-1