Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.

The number of citations that papers receive has become significant in measuring researchers' scientific productivity, and such measurements are important when one seeks career opportunities and research funding. Skewed citation practices can thus have profound effects on academic careers. We in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mariana C Teixeira, Sidinei M Thomaz, Thaisa S Michelan, Roger P Mormul, Thamis Meurer, José Vitor B Fasolli, Márcio J Silveira
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3859513?pdf=render
id doaj-beed8b9e665348db85c144df4ab3b974
record_format Article
spelling doaj-beed8b9e665348db85c144df4ab3b9742020-11-24T21:50:26ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-01812e8187110.1371/journal.pone.0081871Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.Mariana C TeixeiraSidinei M ThomazThaisa S MichelanRoger P MormulThamis MeurerJosé Vitor B FasolliMárcio J SilveiraThe number of citations that papers receive has become significant in measuring researchers' scientific productivity, and such measurements are important when one seeks career opportunities and research funding. Skewed citation practices can thus have profound effects on academic careers. We investigated (i) how frequently authors misinterpret original information and (ii) how frequently authors inappropriately cite reviews instead of the articles upon which the reviews are based. To reach this aim, we carried a survey of ecology journals indexed in the Web of Science and assessed the appropriateness of citations of review papers. Reviews were significantly more often cited than regular articles. In addition, 22% of citations were inaccurate, and another 15% unfairly gave credit to the review authors for other scientists' ideas. These practices should be stopped, mainly through more open discussion among mentors, researchers and students.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3859513?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mariana C Teixeira
Sidinei M Thomaz
Thaisa S Michelan
Roger P Mormul
Thamis Meurer
José Vitor B Fasolli
Márcio J Silveira
spellingShingle Mariana C Teixeira
Sidinei M Thomaz
Thaisa S Michelan
Roger P Mormul
Thamis Meurer
José Vitor B Fasolli
Márcio J Silveira
Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Mariana C Teixeira
Sidinei M Thomaz
Thaisa S Michelan
Roger P Mormul
Thamis Meurer
José Vitor B Fasolli
Márcio J Silveira
author_sort Mariana C Teixeira
title Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
title_short Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
title_full Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
title_fullStr Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
title_full_unstemmed Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
title_sort incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description The number of citations that papers receive has become significant in measuring researchers' scientific productivity, and such measurements are important when one seeks career opportunities and research funding. Skewed citation practices can thus have profound effects on academic careers. We investigated (i) how frequently authors misinterpret original information and (ii) how frequently authors inappropriately cite reviews instead of the articles upon which the reviews are based. To reach this aim, we carried a survey of ecology journals indexed in the Web of Science and assessed the appropriateness of citations of review papers. Reviews were significantly more often cited than regular articles. In addition, 22% of citations were inaccurate, and another 15% unfairly gave credit to the review authors for other scientists' ideas. These practices should be stopped, mainly through more open discussion among mentors, researchers and students.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3859513?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT marianacteixeira incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT sidineimthomaz incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT thaisasmichelan incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT rogerpmormul incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT thamismeurer incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT josevitorbfasolli incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
AT marciojsilveira incorrectcitationsgiveunfaircredittoreviewauthorsinecologyjournals
_version_ 1725884034114912256