Source-linked AI summary
Core Elements in the Process of Citing Publications: A Conceptual Overview of the Literature
Iman Tahamtan, Lutz Bornmann
TL;DR
Citation research spans competing explanations and empirical studies, but the literature is uneven across parts of the citation process. This paper synthesizes that work around three core elements and finds that citation decisions reflect multiple values and influences. The overview offers a framework for understanding citation practices and interpreting citation analyses in research evaluation.
Problem
The literature includes many studies of cited-document features but few studies of the citing-document side, leaving limited evidence about how citing-side features relate to citation and document selection.
Source: §4 · p. 31Method
The paper presents a conceptual overview of citation theories and empirical studies, structured around cited-document context, selection-to-citation processes, and citing-document context.
Source: §1 · p. 5, §2 · p. 6, §4 · p. 28Results
The overview identifies multiple factors and values shaping citation decisions, including document, author, and journal features and authors’ reasons for citing.
Source: §4 · pp. 29–31Takeaways & Limitations
The framework can help answer questions about citation decisions and interpret citation analyses in research evaluation.
Source: §1 · p. 5, §4 · p. 31The literature search was conducted in 2017, and the review found few studies of citing-document features and their relationship to citation and document selection.
Source: §2 · p. 6, §4 · p. 31
Abstract
from arXiv · showhide
This study provides a conceptual overview of the literature dealing with the process of citing documents (focusing on the literature from the recent decade). It presents theories, which have been proposed for explaining the citation process, and studies having empirically analyzed this process. The overview is referred to as conceptual, because it is structured based on core elements in the citation process: the context of the cited document, processes from selection to citation of documents, and the context of the citing document. The core elements are presented in a schematic representation. The overview can be used to find answers on basic questions about the practice of citing documents. Besides understanding of the process of citing, it delivers basic information for the proper application of citations in research evaluation.
1 Introduction
Citation theories explain why scholars cite, but no single account captures the process. This study reviews theories and empirical work through the cited-document context, the path from selection to citation, and the citing-document context.
1 Introduction
- Normative theory treats citations as credit for documents that influenced the citing author, grounding citation counts as measures of peer recognition.Merton links citing to a belief in giving credit and the hope of receiving it through peer recognition.Source: §1 · p. 3
- Critics argue that cognitive influence alone cannot explain citation decisions; social-constructivist accounts treat citations as rhetorical devices, including tools of persuasion.Gilbert argues authors may cite reputable researchers to persuade readers, rather than because of the cited work’s content.Source: §1 · pp. 3–4
- Nicolaisen proposes that reputational costs can discourage dishonest referencing, while noting that honesty and deceit may vary across scientific communities; the theory remains untested (Nicolaisen, 2004, 2007).The account draws on the handicap principle and has been described as a topic for further research.Source: §1 · p. 4
- The overview focuses on historical landmarks and literature since 2008, synthesizing empirical citation research without aiming to cover the extensive literature completely.It is organized around the cited document, the process from selection to citation, and the citing document, and is intended to help interpret citation analyses in research evaluation.Source: §1 · p. 5
2 Methods: search for the literature
The literature search combined journal contents and earlier reviews with follow-up searches in bibliographic databases and citation trails.
2 Methods: search for the literature
- The search was conducted in 2017 and covered multiple document types, including articles, reviews, collected works, and monographs.The initial search examined contents of information-science journals and reference lists from prior literature reviews.Source: §2 · p. 6
- A bibliogram of located titles and abstracts supplied frequent keywords for searches in Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar.The reported example keywords include citation analysis, theory of citation, and citation theory.Source: §2 · p. 6
- The search also identified publications citing a set of highly cited papers located in the earlier search steps.Relevant studies were first identified through journal contents and prior reviews.Source: §2 · p. 6
3 Core elements in the process of citation
The overview condenses citation research into three connected elements: the cited document, the selection-to-citation process, and the citing document.
3 Core elements in the process of citation
- The cited-document element concerns features of the document that is referred to.The overview distinguishes this document from the one that cites it.Source: §3 · pp. 6–7
- The citing-document element concerns features of the document that makes the citation.Studies across the three elements examine document, author, or journal features relevant to citation.Source: §3 · pp. 6–7
- The selection-to-citation element links cited and citing documents through authors’ reasons to cite and rules for selecting documents.These reasons and rules characterize the process connecting the two documents.Source: §3 · p. 7
3.1 Cited document
The cited document’s perceived value reflects its content and accessibility as well as author and journal features. These values inform whether authors consider, read, and cite a document.
3.1.1 Document features
- Authors assess a document’s title, abstract, and keywords, including topicality; hot-topic relevance may attract attention and citations.If these initial elements seem relevant, authors may examine the full text; title and abstract features also include length, wording, and format.Source: §3.1.1 · pp. 8–9
- Perceived quality, accessibility, and document orientation or level also shape assessment, although quality has no agreed definition and varies by discipline.Orientation includes document type and study design, while level refers to intended audiences; availability can affect whether a document is read.Source: §3.1.1 · pp. 9–10
- Early citations can increase a document’s subsequent visibility, while reference counts and reference characteristics have also been associated with citation counts.In one comparison, selected healthcare studies had about three times as many citations on average as unselected studies; review papers’ long reference lists may inflate journal impact factors.Source: §3.1.1 · pp. 10–11
3.1.2 Author features
- Author authority, organizational context, demographics, relationships, and collaboration can influence how citing authors perceive a document’s value and whether they select it.Documents by authors connected to the citing author as friends, advisors, or former employers may be more likely to be read.Source: §3.1.2 · pp. 11–12
3.1.3 Journal features
- Journal centrality, scope, audience, language, and interdisciplinarity are among journal characteristics associated with attention and citation.Prominent journals may attract cross-field attention, and a weak document in a prestigious journal may still receive considerable citations.Source: §3.1.3 · pp. 12–13
3.1.4 Document values
- Five document values—epistemic, functional, conditional, social, and emotional—underlie decisions to consider, read, and cite documents.Epistemic value concerns knowledge or information; functional value concerns contribution to the citing document; social value reflects associations with groups or people; emotional value concerns positive or negative feelings.Source: §3.1.4 · pp. 13–14
3.2 From selection to citation
Citation selection involves both authors’ reasons for citing a document and the decision rules they use to choose it. The literature describes varied motivations and rules that shape whether documents are selected.
3.2 From selection to citation
- Citing authors combine reasons for citing documents with decision rules to select or reject them.The reasons may include criticizing cited work, while decisions may follow rules such as elimination or dominance.Source: §3.2 · p. 15
3.2.1 Reasons to cite
- A document may be cited for different reasons by different authors, and an author’s reasons for citing it may change over time.Harwood (2009) and Case and Higgins (2000) describe this variation.Source: §3.2.1 · p. 15
- Citations serve varied purposes, including acknowledging foundational work, persuading readers, supporting claims, and criticizing prior findings.Other described purposes include methodological use, background, conceptual reference, and contrast; Garfield’s early list spans scientific and non-scientific reasons.Source: §3.2.1 · pp. 15–17
3.2.2 Decision rules
- Citation decisions include elimination using one salient criterion, multiple-criteria evaluation, and dominance that favors a document excelling in at least one aspect.When few documents exist, authors may lower selection thresholds; the satisfice rule ends searching once enough documents have been selected, while the chain rule favors connected sets.Source: §3.2.2 · pp. 20–21
3.3 Citing document
Citation patterns in a citing document reflect both where and how often references appear and features of the document, its authors, and its journal. Citation location can also indicate a reference’s role or relevance.
3.3.1 Location and number of citations
- Citations tend to cluster at the beginnings and endings of documents, and their location can indicate the reason for citation and the reference’s relevance.Conceptual citations tend to appear in introductions, while citations of comparable results often appear in discussions; one study found references outside introductions are generally considered most valuable.Source: §3.3.1 · pp. 22–23
3.3.2 Document features
- Reference counts and distributions vary by document type and discipline; reviews usually cite more documents than original articles.Fields also differ in reference distributions and self-citation rates.Source: §3.3.2 · pp. 24–25
3.3.3 Author features
- Authors’ topic and disciplinary knowledge can shape how they interpret documents and apply citation decision rules.Citation cartels and coauthorship also relate to citation patterns; the increase in self-citations explains only a small part of the higher citation rates associated with more authors.Source: §3.3.3 · pp. 26–27
3.3.4 Journal features
- Journal expectations and reference limits can affect which documents authors cite, leaving some relevant works uncited.Editors may also use inter-journal citations to increase journal impact factors.Source: §3.3.4 · pp. 27–28
4 Discussion
The overview organizes citation research around cited-document context, the selection-to-citation process, and citing-document context. It shows how this framework can inform citation analysis and bibliometric evaluation while identifying gaps in research on the citing side.
4 Discussion
- Citations can be analyzed by their perceived values and authors’ reasons, not only counted, with reasons differing in relevance to scientific progress.Methodological or operational reasons may be more relevant than perfunctory ones.Source: §4 · p. 29
- Authors’ selection decisions reflect perceived document value, but can also involve journal requirements, citation cartels, perfunctory citation, and ritualized references to landmarks.The overview describes citation decisions as varying across authors and the factors, rules, and reasons involved.Source: §4 · p. 30
- Authors’ topic knowledge affects what they find and cite, while newcomers may omit original publications or cite later works that refer to them.The differing availability of literature from searches also affects what is cited, where, and how often.Source: §4 · pp. 30–31
- The overview can help interpret citation decisions in specific documents and provide context for evaluative bibliometric reports.It directs readers to possible citation reasons and factors associated with high or low citation counts on both the cited and citing sides.Source: §4 · p. 31
- The reviewed empirical literature focuses more on cited-document factors than citing-document factors, and information linking citing-document features to selection and citation remains lacking.The authors note that data availability shapes research and full text has only recently become more accessible.Source: §4 · pp. 31–32
- Future studies could use citation-context data, online activity measures, and interviews to investigate document values, reasons to cite, and selection decisions.Suggested activity measures include views, downloads, saves, and social-media discussion or recommendations.Source: §4 · p. 32