Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives toward referencing. The reference threshold model

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives of authors toward referencing proves that references-citations can be used for exploring information links between items referencing and referenced. Asreferencing can be assumed as apeer evaluation process resulted in referencing some papers and neglecting others, citations obtained can be applied for assessing international impact of scientific publication activity.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  1. R. Atkinson, The citation as intertext: Toward a theory of the selection process,Library Resources and Technical Services, 28 (1984) 109–119.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. L. Porter, Citation analysis: Queries and caveats,Social Studies of Science,7 (1977) 257–267.

    Google Scholar 

  3. K. O. May, Abuses of citation indexing,Science, 156 (1967) 890–892.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D. De Solla Price, Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology and non-science, In:Communication Among Scientists and Engineers, C. E. Nelson, D. K. Pollock (Eds), Heath & Co., Lexington, Mass., 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  5. N. Kaplan, The norms of citation behavior: Prolegomena to the footnote, American Documentation, 3 (1965) 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. K. MertonSocial Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, New York, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. Vinkler, A természettudományos publikációk hivatkozásainak kvázikvantitív modellje,Kutatás-Fejlesztés, Tudományszervezési Tájékoztató, 4 (1986) 250–278.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. H. Macroberts, B. R. Macroberts, Citation content analysis of a botany journal,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48 (1997) 274–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. G. Prabha, Some aspects of citation behavior: A pilot study in business administration,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34 (1983) 202–206

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. I. Spiegel-Rösing, Science studies: Bibliometric and content analysis,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. Oppenheim, S. P. Renn, Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29 (1978) 225–231.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  17. B. Cronin,The Citation Process, The Role and Significance of Citations in Scientific Communication, Taylor Graham, London, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  18. S. K. Sen, Theoretical issues in citation process: A review,The International Journal of Scientometrics and Informetrics, 2 (1996) 159–198.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. J. E. J. Oberski, Some statistical aspects of co-citation cluster analysis and a judgement by physicists, In:Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, A. F. J. van Raan, (Ed), Elsevier, 1988, pp. 431–462.

  22. B. Cronin, Norms and functions in citation: The view of journal editors and referees in psychology,Social Science Information Studies, 2 (1982) 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. F. W. Lancaster, M. Porta, K. Plagenz, K. Szymborski, M. Krebs, Factors influencing sources cited by scientists: A case study for Cuba,Scientometrics, 10 (1986) 241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. A. J. Chapman, Assessing research: Citation-count shortcomings,The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 8 (1989) 336–344.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. A. Virgo, A statistical procedure for evaluating the importance of scientific papers,The Library Quarterly, 47 (1977) 415–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. E. Garfield,Citation Indexing—Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities, A Wiley-Interscience Publication, New York, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. F. Moed, Bibliometric measurement of research performance and Price's theory of differences among the sciences,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 473–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. R. E. Stern, Uncitedness in the biomedical literature,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41 (1990) 193–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. P. Vinkler, Possible causes of differences in information impact of journals from different subfields,Scientometrics, 20 (1991) 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. H. P. F. Peters, A. F. J. van Raan, On determinants of citations scores: A case study in chemical engineering,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45 (1994) 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. M. J. Lovaglia, Status characteristics of journal articles for editor's decisions and citations. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of theSociety for Social Studies of Science, November 15–18, 1989, University of California at Irvine, CA.

  32. E. Garfield, A. Welljams-Dorof, Citaton data: Their use as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy making,Science and Public Policy, 19 (1992) 321–327.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Z. Liu, Citation theories in the framework of international flow of information: New evidence with translation analysis,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48 (1997) 80–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. S. M. Lawani, A. E. Bayer, Validity of citation criteria for assessing the influence of scientific publications: New evidence with peer assessment,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34 (1983) 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  35. K. S. Puder, J. P. Morgan, Persuading by citation: An analysis of the references of fifty-three published reports of phenylpropanolamine's clinical toxicity,Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 42 (1987) 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. J. Cole, S. Cole, Measuring the quality of sociological research: Problems in the use of the Science Citation Index,The American Sociologist, 6 (1971) 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  37. A. J. Nederhof, A. F. J. Van Raan, A validation study of bibliometric indicators: The comparative performance of cum laude doctorates in chemistry,Scientometrics, 17 (1989) 427–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. P. Nieminen, Type of empirical research reports as an explanatory factor in citation performance of psychiatric research,Scientometrics, 35 (1996) 309–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. J. A. Stewart, Achievement and ascriptive processes in the recognition of scientific articles,Social Forces, 62 (1983) 166–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. S. M. Lawani, Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 13–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. J. S. Katz, D. Hicks, How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model,Scientometrics, 40 (1997) 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. J. T. Guthrie, M. Seifert, L. Mosberg, Research synthesis in reading: Topics, audiences, and citation rates,Reading Research Quarterly, 19 (1983) 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. H. F. Moed, W. J. M. Burger, J. G. Frankfort, A. F. J. Van Raan, The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance,Research Policy, 14 (1985) 131–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. S. P. Harter, P. A. Hooten, Information science and scientists: JASIS, 1972–1990,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43 (1992) 583–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. J. King, A review of bibliometric and other science indicators and their role in research evaluation,Journal of Information Science, 13 (1987) 261–276.

    Google Scholar 

  46. L. Egghe, I. K. Ravichandra Rao, R. Rousseau, On the influence of production on utilization functions: Obsolescence or increased use?Scientometrics, 34 (1995) 285–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. P. Vinkler, Relationships between the rate of scientific development and citations. The chance for citedness model,Scientometrics, 35 (1996) 375–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. L. Egghe, On the influence of growth on obsolescence,Scientometrics, 27 (1993) 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. L. Egghe, Price index and its relation to the mean and median reference age,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48 (1997) 564–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. B. R. Martin, J. Irvine, Assessing basic research. Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy,Research Policy, 12 (1983) 61–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. M. D. Gordon, Citation ranking versus subjective evaluation in the determination of journal hierarchies in the social sciences.Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 33 (1982) 55–57.

    Google Scholar 

  52. K. E. Clark,America's Psychologists: A Survey of a Growing Profession, American Psychological Association, Washington, D. C., 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  53. W. O. Hagstrom, Inputs, outputs, and the prestige of university science departments,Sociology of Education, 44 (1971) 375–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. L. R. Jauch, W. F. Glueck, Evaluation of university professors' research performance,Management Science, 22 (1975) 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. S. B. Gottfredson, W. D. Garvey, J. Goodnow, Scientific quality and the journal article publication process, In:Communication: The Essence of Science, W. D. Garvey (Ed), Pergamon Press, 1979, pp. 231–255.

  56. H. F. Moed, W. J. M. Burger, J. G. Frankfort, A. F. J. Van Raan, A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement,Scientometrics, 8 (1985) 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. J. T. Wallmark, K. G. Sedig, Quality of research measured by citation method and by peer review–A comparison,IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 33 (1986) 218–222.

    Google Scholar 

  58. E. Dean, J. Davies, Frequency of citation and reputational assessment of contributors in physical therapy,Physical Therapy, 66 (1986) 961–966.

    Google Scholar 

  59. A. J. Nederhof, A. F. J. Van Raan, A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review,Research Policy, 22 (1993) 353–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. C. Oppenheim, The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings for British library and information science university departments,Journal of Documentation, 51 (1995) 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  61. G. Sonnert, What makes a good scientist? Determinants of peer evaluation among biologists,Social Studies of Science, 25 (1995) 35–55.

    Google Scholar 

  62. C. Y. K. So, Citation ranking versus expert judgment in evaluating communication scholars: Effect of research speciality size and individual prominence,Scientometrics, 41 (1998) 325–333.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  63. D. Crouch, J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, Bibliometric analysis for science policy: An evaluation of the United Kingdom's research performance in ocean currents and protein crystallography,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 239–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. B. R. Martin, N. Minchin, J. Skea, T. Peacock, D. Crouch, J. Irvine, The assessment of scientific research. A case-study of CERN,Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 12 (1987) 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  65. D. Hicks, J. Potter, Sociology of scientific knowledge: A reflexive citation analysis or science disciplines and disciplining science,Social Studies of Science, 21 (1991) 459–501.

    Google Scholar 

  66. R. Miller, The influence of primary task on R & D laboratory evaluation: A comparative bibliometric analysis,R & D Management, 22 (1992) 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  67. R. Plomp, The highly cited papers of professors as an indicator of a research group's scientific performance,Scientometrics, 29 (1994) 377–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. S. M. Lawani, Citation analysis and the quality of scientific productivity,BioScience 27 (1977) 26–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. S. C. Hayes, When more is less: Quantity versus quality of publications in the evaluation of academic vitae,American Psychologist, 38 (1983) 1398–1400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. M. E. D. Koenig, Bioliometric indicators versus expert opinion in assessing research performance,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34 (1983) 136–145.

    Google Scholar 

  71. H. F. Moed, R. E. De Bruin, Th. N. Van Leeuwen, New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications,Scientometrics, 33 (1995) 381–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. J. H. Westbrook, Identifying significant research,Science, 132 (1960) 1229–1234.

    Google Scholar 

  73. R. Dalpé, F. Anderson, National priorities in academic research-strategic research and contract in renewable energies,Research Policy, 24 (1995) 563–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. J. R. Cole, S. Cole, The Ortega Hypothesis,Science, 178 (1972) 368–375.

    Google Scholar 

  75. S. Cole, J. Cole,Social Stratification in Science, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  76. L. L. Hargens, H. Schuman, Citation counts and social comparisons: Scientists' use and evaluation of citation index data,Social Science Research, 19 (1990) 205–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. C. R. Myers, Journal citations and scientific eminence in contemporary psychology,American Psychologist, 25 (1970) 1041–1048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. B. Cronin, K. Overfelt, Citation-based auditing of academic performance,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45 (1994) 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chemical Research Center, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Pusztaszeri út 59-67, 1025, Budapest, (Hungary)

    P. Vinkler

Authors
  1. P. Vinkler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Comments on Theories of Citation?L. Leydesdorff,Scientometrics,43 (1998) No. 1.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vinkler, P. Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives toward referencing. The reference threshold model. Scientometrics 43, 107–127 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458400

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458400

Keywords

Search

Navigation