Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Citation-Based Criterion for Identifying Long-Lasting Research Papers


Affiliations
1 Department of Library and Information Science,Department of Chemistry, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411 007,, India
2 Interdisciplinary School of Scientific Computing and Department of Chemistry, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411 007, India
 

This work presents the development and testing of a protocol for identifying long-lasting (L-L) research papers for which citation data of at least 25 years are available. In the first step, papers having 100 or more citations are shortlisted. The time interval from the year of publication till 2019 is divided into four approximately equal quarters. The R4 parameter is defined as the ratio of the citations received by a paper in the most recent quarter to its total citations. Papers with R4 less than a prescribed cut-off value are eliminated. The trends in the citations of papers in the most recent five years are assessed next. Papers with less than a specified value of actual/extrapolated citations are omitted. For testing purpose, we have explored the citation patterns of 1,402 shortlisted papers, out of a total of 123,993 published from India between 1985 and 1994, resulting into 676 L-L papers. We find that not all papers published in high-impact journals as well as those receiving large citations fulfil the L-L criterion. Subject-wise analysis brings out the disciplines making lasting contributions to research.

Keywords

Citation Analysis, High-impact Journals, Impact Factor, Long-lasting Research Papers.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Garfield, E., Science citation index – a new dimension in indexing. Science, 1964, 144, 649–654.

  • Roldan-Valadez, E., Salazar-Ruiz, S. Y., Ibarra-Contreras, R. and Rios, C., Current concepts on bibliometrics: a brief review about impact factor, eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, source-normalised impact per paper, h-index, and alternative metrics. Irish. J. Med. Sci., 2019, 188, 939–951.

  • Seglen, P. O., Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ, 1997, 314, 497.

  • Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A. and Pappas, G., Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J., 2008, 22, 338–342.

  • Wouters, P. et al., Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal. Nature, 2019, 569, 621–623.

  • Garfield, E., Premature discovery or delayed recognition – Why. Curr. Cont., 1980, 21, 5–10.

  • Aversa, E., Citation patterns of highly cited papers and their relationship to literature aging: a study of the working literature.Scientometrics, 1985, 7, 383–389.

  • Glänzel, W. and Schoepflin, U., A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature. J. Inf. Sci., 1995, 21, 37–53.

  • Moed, H. F., Leeuwen, T. N. V. and Reedijk, J., A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors. J. Doc., 1998, 54, 387–419.

  • Aksnes, D. W., Characteristics of highly cited papers. Res. Eval., 2003, 12, 159–170.

  • van Raan, A. F. J., Sleeping beauties in science. Scientometrics, 2004, 59, 467–472.

  • van Daylan, H. P. and Henkens, K. N., Signals in science – on the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science. Scientometrics, 2005, 64, 209–233.

  • Walters, G. D., The citation life cycle of articles published in 13 American Psychological Association journals: a 25-year longitudinal analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2011, 62, 1629– 1636.

  • Wang, D., Song, C. and Barabási, A. L., Quantifying long-term scientific impact. Science, 2013, 342, 127–132.

  • Abt, H. A., Long-term citation histories of astronomical papers. Astron. Soc. Pac., 1981, 93, 207.

  • Nash, J. R., Araújo, R. J. and Shideler, G. S., Contributing factors to long-term citation count in marine and freshwater biology articles. Learn. Publ., 2018, 31, 131–139.

  • Kosteas, V. D., Predicting long-run citation counts for articles in top economics journals. Scientometrics, 2018, 115, 1395– 1412.

  • Stegehuis, C., Litvak, N. and Waltman, L., Predicting the longterm citation impact of recent publications. J. Informetr., 2015, 9, 642–657.

  • Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A. and Felici, G., Predicting publication long-term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor. J. Informetr., 2019, 13, 32–49.

  • Xiao, S. et al., On modeling and predicting individual paper citation count over time. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-16), 2016, pp. 2676–2682.

  • Leydesdorff, L., Bornmann, L., Comins, J. A. and Milojević, S., Citations: Indicators of quality? The impact fallacy. Front. Res. Metr. Anal., 2016, 1, 1.

  • Garfield, E., Introducing citation classics – human side of scientific reports. Curr. Cont., 1977, 1, 5–7.

  • Garfield, E., How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluation and when is it relevant? Part 1. Curr. Cont., 1983, 44, 5–13.

  • Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N. and van Raan, A. F., Is scientific literature subject to a ‘sell-by-date’? A general methodology to analyze the durability of scientific documents. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2010, 61, 329–339.


Abstract Views: 161

PDF Views: 82




  • Citation-Based Criterion for Identifying Long-Lasting Research Papers

Abstract Views: 161  |  PDF Views: 82

Authors

Shubhada Nagarkar
Department of Library and Information Science,Department of Chemistry, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411 007,, India
Shridhar R. Gadre
Interdisciplinary School of Scientific Computing and Department of Chemistry, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411 007, India

Abstract


This work presents the development and testing of a protocol for identifying long-lasting (L-L) research papers for which citation data of at least 25 years are available. In the first step, papers having 100 or more citations are shortlisted. The time interval from the year of publication till 2019 is divided into four approximately equal quarters. The R4 parameter is defined as the ratio of the citations received by a paper in the most recent quarter to its total citations. Papers with R4 less than a prescribed cut-off value are eliminated. The trends in the citations of papers in the most recent five years are assessed next. Papers with less than a specified value of actual/extrapolated citations are omitted. For testing purpose, we have explored the citation patterns of 1,402 shortlisted papers, out of a total of 123,993 published from India between 1985 and 1994, resulting into 676 L-L papers. We find that not all papers published in high-impact journals as well as those receiving large citations fulfil the L-L criterion. Subject-wise analysis brings out the disciplines making lasting contributions to research.

Keywords


Citation Analysis, High-impact Journals, Impact Factor, Long-lasting Research Papers.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv120%2Fi1%2F209-214