21–30 of 48 posts
> “Lack of citation cannot be interpreted as meaning articles are useless or valueless,” says David Pendlebury, a senior citations analyst at Clarivate. On the other hand, presence of citation can not be interpreted as meaning articles are useful or valuable. For one, there could be chains of useless and valueless papers citing each other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be honest, now that you mentioned this, I'm really curious how warm a squirrel's tail is.
Seriously, you should write a paper on it when you learn
[1]: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/physzool.57...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the methods section, they do say that "first author self-citations were excluded." One of the figures in the Nature article also pulls out self-citations. https://arxiv.org/abs/0809.5250
Do note however that many times the first author is not the principal investigator (ie the person that has the funding for the study and is often tenure track faculty) but is often a graduate student or a post-doc. The principal investigator may be in the middle or even at the end of the author list. Thus just excluding first author self-citations is probably inadequate. The chances are high that a grad student or po…
10% of papers being completely uncited is a little misleading. There is a long tail of papers with 1 or 2 citations that were hardly read beyond the abstract and only cited to up a paper's number of references and had a few good keywords. That research is effectively uncited. The reason for this isn't really surprising: Most research isn't that groundbreaking. Most research is done because if you don't produce a pape…
The squirrel cares.
I tried to ask my mother once what women typically considered to be the dimensions of female attractiveness (e.g. breast size is something people commonly care about, while toe length isn't). Instead I got an answer consisting of a list of things a woman trying to be attractive would do before appearing in a public place. I asked whether facial features weren't considered a big part of attractiveness, and the reply was that yes, they are, but women devote almost no time to their facial features because they are basically impossible to change.
SImilarly, a squirrel may be too cold, or too hot, but it can't really change its tail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do note however that many times the first author is not the principal investigator (ie the person that has the funding for the study and is often tenure track faculty) but is often a graduate student or a post-doc. The principal investigator may be in the middle or even at the end of the author list. Thus just excluding first author self-citations is probably inadequate. The chances are high that a grad student or po…
The rule to read the author list, simplified: first author did the work. Last author funded the research. Everyone else contributed somewhat.
It seems to me, based to some extent on my own experience, that a paper has a harder time getting cited when it's a bit off the beaten track (and might in fact be more original, trail-blazing and interesting), because by definition it's a bit lonely in its field. Conversely, when the work is fairly derivative it gets lumped in with others and is easier to cite as part of the related work section of another paper, eve…
I was looking into a CS academic who claimed to be widely cited. Mostly it was self-citation, in his own papers. He seemed to be the editor of a journal which published a lot of his own papers citing himself. I couldn't help thinking of that looking at the graph of decreasing uncited papers.
10% of papers being completely uncited is a little misleading. There is a long tail of papers with 1 or 2 citations that were hardly read beyond the abstract and only cited to up a paper's number of references and had a few good keywords. That research is effectively uncited. The reason for this isn't really surprising: Most research isn't that groundbreaking. Most research is done because if you don't produce a pape…
The squirrel cares.
Even if the squirrel was able to access the article, the follow up research the squirrel does won't be indexed by Google so I can't add to my H-index (my H-index is a whopping 1 btw), so none of it really matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do note however that many times the first author is not the principal investigator (ie the person that has the funding for the study and is often tenure track faculty) but is often a graduate student or a post-doc. The principal investigator may be in the middle or even at the end of the author list. Thus just excluding first author self-citations is probably inadequate. The chances are high that a grad student or po…
The rule to read the author list, simplified: first author did the work. Last author funded the research. Everyone else contributed somewhat.