J Korean Med Sci.  2015 Nov;30(11):1545-1552. 10.3346/jkms.2015.30.11.1545.

Preserving the Integrity of Citations and References by All Stakeholders of Science Communication

• Gasparyan
• Yessirkepov M
• Voronov AA
• Gerasimov
• Kostyukova EI
• Kitas GD

• KMID: 2351102
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2015.30.11.1545

Abstract

Citations to scholarly items are building bricks for multidisciplinary science communication. Citation analyses are currently influencing individual career advancement and ranking of academic and research institutions worldwide. This article overviews the involvement of scientific authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, indexers, and learned associations in the citing and referencing to preserve the integrity of science communication. Authors are responsible for thorough bibliographic searches to select relevant references for their articles, comprehend main points, and cite them in an ethical way. Reviewers and editors may perform additional searches and recommend missing essential references. Publishers, in turn, are in a position to instruct their authors over the citations and references, provide tools for validation of references, and open access to bibliographies. Publicly available reference lists bear important information about the novelty and relatedness of the scholarly items with the published literature. Few editorial associations have dealt with the issue of citations and properly managed references. As a prime example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued in December 2014 an updated set of recommendations on the need for citing primary literature and avoiding unethical references, which are applicable to the global scientific community. With the exponential growth of literature and related references, it is critically important to define functions of all stakeholders of science communication in curbing the issue of irrational and unethical citations and thereby improve the quality and indexability of scholarly journals.

Keyword

Science Communication; Bibliography as Topic; Periodicals as Topic; Citations; Publication Ethics

MeSH Terms

Authorship/standards
*Bibliography as Topic
*Editorial Policies
Information Dissemination/ethics
Peer Review, Research/ethics/*standards
Periodicals as Topic/ethics/*standards
Publishing/ethics/*standards
Quality Control
Science/ethics/standards
Writing/*standards

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 The expanding role of citations and references of scholarly articles.

Reference

1. Biebuyck JF. Concerning the ethics and accuracy of scientific citations. Anesthesiology. 1992; 77:1–2.

2. On citing well. Nat Chem Bio. 2010; 6:79.

3. Bryson D. Using research papers: citations, referencing and plagiarism. J Vis Commun Med. 2012; 35:82–84.

4. Annesley TM. Giving credit: citations and references. Clin Chem. 2011; 57:14–17.

5. Gasparyan AY, Kitas GD. Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals. Croat Med J. 2012; 53:386–389.

6. Review of ResearchGate: Pros and cons and recommendations. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://blogs.exeter.ac.uk/openresearchexeter/2013/11/06/74/.

7. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Blackmore H, Kitas GD. Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors. Rheumatol Int. 2011; 31:1409–1417.

8. Ezeala C, Nweke I, Ezeala M. Common errors in manuscripts submitted to medical science journals. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2013; 3:376–379.

9. Barroga EF. Reference accuracy: authors', reviewers', editors', and publishers' contributions. J Korean Med Sci. 2014; 29:1587–1589.

10. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Kitas GD. Multidisciplinary bibliographic databases. J Korean Med Sci. 2013; 28:1270–1275.

11. Hassan SU, Muazzam A. Analyzing institutional research publications, citations and collaboration activities in sustainable development and its sub-areas, with particular reference to Asian institutions. J Sustain Sci Manag. 2013; 8:180–190.

12. Hjørland B. Citation analysis: a social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization. Inf Process Manag. 2013; 49:1313–1325.

13. Chen J, Zhuge H. Summarization of scientific documents by detecting common facts in citations. Future Gener Comput Syst. 2014; 32:246–252.

14. Hristovski D, Dinevski D, Kastrin A, Rindflesch TC. Biomedical question answering using semantic relations. BMC Bioinformatics. 2015; 16:6.

15. Todd PA, Ladle RJ. Citations: poor practices by authors reduce their value. Nature. 2008; 451:244.

16. Hong ST. Ten tips for authors of scientific articles. J Korean Med Sci. 2014; 29:1035–1037.

17. Davids JR, Weigl DM, Edmonds JP, Blackhurst DW. Reference accuracy in peer-reviewed pediatric orthopaedic literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92:1155–1161.

18. Haussmann NS, McIntyre T, Bumby AJ, Loubser MJ. Referencing practices in physical geography: how well do we cite what we write? Prog Phys Geogr. 2013; 0309133313482135.

19. Todd PA, Guest JR, Lu J, Chou LM. One in four citations in marine biology papers is inappropriate. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2010; 408:299–303.

20. Teixeira MC, Thomaz SM, Michelan TS, Mormul RP, Meurer T, Fasolli JV, Silveira MJ. Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals. PLoS One. 2013; 8:e81871.

21. Luo M, Li CC, Molina D 4th, Andersen CR, Panchbhavi VK. Accuracy of citation and quotation in foot and ankle surgery journals. Foot Ankle Int. 2013; 34:949–955.

22. Kangas A, Hujala T. Challenges in publishing: producing, assuring, and communicating quality. Silva Fenn. 2015; 49:1304.

23. Krasne S, Stevens CD, Wilkerson L. Improving medical literature sourcing by first-year medical students in problem-based learning: outcomes of early interventions. Acad Med. 2014; 89:1069–1074.

24. Barbosa FG, Schneck F. Characteristics of the top-cited papers in species distribution predictive models. Ecol Modell. 2015; 313:77–83.

25. Yang X, Gu J, Yan H, Xu Z, Ren B, Yang Y, Yang X, Chen Q, Tan S. The highly-cited Electrocardiogram-related articles in science citation index expanded: characteristics and hotspots. J Electrocardiol. 2014; 47:738–744.

26. Eshraghi A, Osman NA, Gholizadeh H, Ali S, Shadgan B. 100 top-cited scientific papers in limb prosthetics. Biomed Eng Online. 2013; 12:119.

27. Tao T, Zhao X, Lou J, Bo L, Wang F, Li J, Deng X. The top cited clinical research articles on sepsis: a bibliometric analysis. Crit Care. 2012; 16:R110.

28. Marcus A, Oransky I. What studies of retractions tell us. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2014; 15:151–154.

29. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Akazhanov NA, Kitas GD. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croat Med J. 2014; 55:61–72.

30. Steen RG. Retractions in the medical literature: how many patients are put at risk by flawed research? J Med Ethics. 2011; 37:688–692.

31. Neale AV, Dailey RK, Abrams J. Analysis of citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct. Sci Eng Ethics. 2010; 16:251–261.

32. Adair JG, Vohra N. The explosion of knowledge, references, and citations. Psychology's unique response to a crisis. Am Psychol. 2003; 58:15–23.

33. Rasmussen K, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Citations of scientific results and conflicts of interest: the case of mammography screening. Evid Based Med. 2013; 18:83–89.

34. Willett P. Readers' perceptions of authors' citation behaviour. J Doc. 2013; 69:145–156.

35. Hu G, Wang G. Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles. J Engl Acad Purp. 2014; 14:14–28.

36. Bornmann L, Daniel HD. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. J Doc. 2008; 64:45–80.

37. Teixeira RK, Yamaki VN, Rosa Rde C, de Barros RS, Botelho NM. Dominance of foreign citations in Brazilian orthopedics journals. Rev Bras Ortop. 2014; 49:668–670.

38. Erikson MG, Erlandson P. A taxonomy of motives to cite. Soc Stud Sci. 2014; 44:625–637.

39. Kim MJ. Citation patterns of Korean physicists and mechanical engineers: differences by type of publication source and type of authorship. Scientometrics. 2002; 55:421–436.

40. Azer SA, Ramani S, Peterson R. Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals. Med Teach. 2012; 34:698–704.

41. Roig M. Avoiding unethical writing practices. Food Chem Toxicol. 2012; 50:3385–3387.

42. Gipp B, Meuschke N, Breitinger C. Citation-based plagiarism detection: Practicability on a large-scale scientific corpus. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2014; 65:1527–1540.

43. Habibzadeh P. Decay of references to Web sites in articles published in general medical journals: mainstream vs small journals. Appl Clin Inform. 2013; 4:455–464.

44. Butler DP, Perry F, Shah Z, Leon-Villapalos J. The quality of video information on burn first aid available on YouTube. Burns. 2013; 39:856–859.

45. Frohlich DO, Birnbrauer K. Discrepancies in health information found on web sites discussing cures for inflammatory bowel disease, an "incurable" disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014; 20:458–463.

46. Bould MD, Hladkowicz ES, Pigford AA, Ufholz LA, Postonogova T, Shin E, Boet S. References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature. BMJ. 2014; 348:g1585.

47. Kräenbring J, Monzon Penza T, Gutmann J, Muehlich S, Zolk O, Wojnowski L, Maas R, Engelhardt S, Sarikas A. Accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia: a comparison with standard textbooks of pharmacology. PLoS One. 2014; 9:e106930.

48. Heilman JM, West AG. Wikipedia and medicine: quantifying readership, editors, and the significance of natural language. J Med Internet Res. 2015; 17:e62.

49. Wilhite AW, Fong EA. Scientific publications. Coercive citation in academic publishing. Science. 2012; 335:542–543.

50. Thombs BD, Levis AW, Razykov I, Syamchandra A, Leentjens AF, Levenson JL, Lumley MA. Potentially coercive self-citation by peer reviewers: a cross-sectional study. J Psychosom Res. 2015; 78:1–6.

51. Sugimoto CR, Cronin B. Citation gamesmanship: testing for evidence of ego bias in peer review. Scientometrics. 2013; 95:851–862.

52. Gasparyan AY. Selecting your editorial board: maintaining standards. J Korean Med Sci. 2013; 28:972–973.

53. Loyola RD, Diniz Filho JA. Citations: ethical ways to grow impact. Nature. 2013; 501:492.

54. Falagas ME, Alexiou VG. Editors may inappropriately influence authors' decisions regarding selection of references in scientific articles. Int J Impot Res. 2007; 19:443–445.

55. Krell FT. Should editors influence journal impact factors? Learn Publ. 2010; 23:59–62.

56. García JA, Rodriguez-Sánchez R, Fdez-Valdivia J. The author-editor game. Scientometrics. 2015; 104:361–380.

57. Lăzăroiu G. On Citation Ethics: editorial shenanigans to boost impact factor. Contemp Readings Law Soc Justice. 2013; 82–87.

58. Huggett S. Journal bibliometrics indicators and citation ethics: a discussion of current issues. Atherosclerosis. 2013; 230:275–277.

59. Romano NC Jr. Journal self-citation V: coercive journal self-citation - manipulations to increase impact factors may do more harm than good in the long run. Comm Assoc Inf Syst. 2009; 25:5.

60. Yu T, Yu G, Wang MY. Classification method for detecting coercive self-citation in journals. J Informetr. 2014; 8:123–135.

61. Citation manipulation: journal retracts paper because author boosted references to a journal he edits. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://retractionwatch.com/2014/02/03/citation-manipulation-journal-retracts-paper-because-author-boosted-references-to-a-journal-he-edits/.

62. Journal retracts two papers after being caught manipulating citations. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://retractionwatch.com/2013/08/30/journal-retracts-two-papers-after-being-caught-manipulating-citations/.

63. Decullier E, Huot L, Samson G, Maisonneuve H. Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study. BMC Res Notes. 2013; 6:238.

64. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Gorin SV, Kitas GD. Upgrading instructions for authors of scholarly journals. Croat Med J. 2014; 55:271–280.

65. Editorial policies. citations. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/editorialpolicies#Citations.

66. Shotton D. Publishing: open citations. Nature. 2013; 502:295–297.

67. Peroni S, Dutton A, Gray T, Shotton D. Setting our bibliographic references free: towards open citation data. J Doc. 2015; 71:253–277.

68. Open Citation Corpus. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://is4oa.org/services/open-citations-corpus/.

69. References. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html#g.

70. CSE's White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/wp-content/uploads/entire_whitepaper.pdf.

71. American Society for Cell Biology. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. Putting science into the assessment of research. accessed on 26 August 2015. Available at http://www.ascb.org/dora/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SFDeclarationFINAL.pdf.

72. Lee SY, Lee JS. A survey of reference accuracy in two Asian dermatologic journals (the Journal of Dermatology and the Korean Journal of Dermatology). Int J Dermatol. 1999; 38:357–360.

73. O'Connor AE, Lukin W, Eriksson L, O'Connor C. Improvement in the accuracy of references in the journal Emergency Medicine Australasia. Emerg Med Australas. 2013; 25:64–67.

74. Buijze GA, Weening AA, Poolman RW, Bhandari M, Ring D. Predictors of the accuracy of quotation of references in peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature in relation to publications on the scaphoid. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94:276–280.