Abstracts
Abstract
Objective – The researchers investigated whether faculty use of the references in articles had a relationship with the later impact of the publication (measured by citation counts). The paper also reported on additional factors that may influence the later impact of publications.
Methods – This researchers analyzed data for articles published by faculty at a large public university from 1995 to 2015. Data were obtained from the Scopus abstract and citation database and analyzed using SPSS27 to conduct Pearson’s correlations and regression analysis.
Results – The number of references included in publications and the number of citations articles received each year following publication have increased over time. Publications received a greater number of citations annually in their 6th to 10th years, compared to the first 5. The number of references included in an article had a weak correlation with the number of citations an article received. Grant funded articles included more references and later received more citations than non-grant funded articles. Several variables, including number of references used in an article, the number of co-authors, and whether the article was grant funded, were shown to correlate with the later impact of a publication.
Conclusion – Based on the results, researchers should seek out grant funding and generously incorporate literature into their co-authored publications to increase their publications' potential for future impact. These factors may influence article quality, resulting in more citations over time. Further research is needed to better understand their influence and the influence of other factors.
Appendices
Bibliography
- Abt, H. A. (1984). Citations to single and multiauthored papers. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 96(583), 746–749. https://doi.org/10.1086/131415
- Ale Ebrahim, N., Ebrahimian, H., Mousavi, M., & Tahriri, F. (2015). Does a long reference list guarantee more citations? Analysis of Malaysian highly cited and review papers. The International Journal of Management Science and Business, 1(3), 6–15. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2572789
- Association of Research Libraries. (2019). Research library impact framework initiative and pilots. https://www.arl.org/category/our-priorities/data-analytics/research-library-impact-framework/
- Association of Research Libraries. (2021). ARL statistics. https://www.arlstatistics.org/
- Bergstrom, C. T., & Bergstrom, T. C. (2004). The costs and benefits of library site licenses to academic journals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(3), 897-902.
- Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., & Wang, J. (2014). How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date? Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 175–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.11.005
- Brennan, M. J., Hurd, J. M., Blecic, D. D., & Weller, A. C. (2002). A snapshot of early adopters of e-journals: Challenges to the library. College & Research Libraries, 63(6), 515–526. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.63.6.515
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). L. Erlbaum Associates.
- Cooke, N. J., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds). (2015). Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. The National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK310394/
- De Groote, S. L., & Barrett, F. A. (2010). Impact of online journals on citation patterns of dentistry, nursing, and pharmacy faculty. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 98(4), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.98.4.008
- De Groote, S. L., & Dorsch, J. L. (2001). Online journals: impact on print journal usage. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 89(4), 372-378.
- De Groote, S. L., Scoulas, J.M., Dempsey, P.R., & Barrett, F. (in press). Faculty publication patterns over 25 years at a large public university. College & Research Libraries.
- De Groote, S. L., Hitchcock, K., & McGowan, R. (2007). Trends in reference usage statistics in an academic health sciences library. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 95(1), 23-30.
- De Groote, S. L., Shultz, M., & Smalheiser, N. R. (2015). Examining the impact of the National Institutes of Health public access policy on the citation rates of journal articles. PLoS ONE, 10(10), e0139951. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139951
- Fowler, J., & Aksnes, D. (2007). Does self-citation pay? Scientometrics, 72(3), 427–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1777-2
- Lovaglia, M. J. (1991). Predicting citations to journal articles: The ideal number of references. The American Sociologist, 22(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691867
- Lin, W. Y. C., & Huang, M. H. (2012). The relationship between co-authorship, currency of references and author self-citations. Scientometrics, 90(2), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0523-6
- Liu, W. (2020). Accuracy of funding information in Scopus: A comparative case study. Scientometrics, 124(1), 803–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0523-6
- National Institutes of Health. (2008). Public access policy. https://publicaccess.nih.gov/
- Sánchez-Gil, S., Gorraiz, J., & Melero-Fuentes, D. (2018). Reference density trends in the major disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.11.003
- Tahamtan, I., Safipour Afshar, A., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2