Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||One in four citations in marine biology papers is inappropriate||Authors:||Todd, P.A.
|Issue Date:||3-Jun-2010||Citation:||Todd, P.A., Guest, J.R., Lu, J., Chou, L.M. (2010-06-03). One in four citations in marine biology papers is inappropriate. Marine Ecology Progress Series 408 : 299-303. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08587||Abstract:||Citing sources that do not support the assertion being made can misinform readers, perpetuate mistakes and deny credit to the researchers who should have been acknowledged. To quantify citation fidelity in marine biology, we retrieved 198 papers from 2 recent issues of 33 marine biology journals. From each paper we randomly selected 1 citation, recovered the source material, and evaluated its appropriateness. We discovered that the assertion was 'clearly supported' by the citation in only 75.8% of cases, the support was 'ambiguous' in 10.6% of cases and the citation offered 'no support' to the original statement in 6.0% of cases. The remaining 7.6% of cases were classified as 'empty' (citations to secondary sources). We found no relationship between citation appropriateness and the position of the assertion in the paper, number of authors, number of references, article length and Journal Impact Factor. That 1 in 4 citations in marine biology should be viewed with scepticism is alarming and has important ramifications for both scholarship and bibliometrics. © Inter-Research 2010 · www.int-res.com.||Source Title:||Marine Ecology Progress Series||URI:||http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/101321||ISSN:||01718630||DOI:||10.3354/meps08587|
|Appears in Collections:||Staff Publications|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
checked on Jan 17, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
checked on Jan 10, 2020
checked on Jan 18, 2020
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.