An investigation of the validity of bibliographic citations

Abstract

Edward O. Wilson, in his famous work, Sociobiology, The New Synthesis [9], makes reference to a pair of articles by W. D. Hamilton, but misquotes the articles' title. No less than 148 later papers make reference to both Wilson's book and Hamilton's articles, by title. Thus, there is provided an opportunity to test the charge, made by some critics, that writers frequently lift their bibliographic references from other publications without consulting the original sources. Although 23% of these citing papers made the same error as did Wilson, a further perusal of the evidence raises considerable doubt as to whether fraudulent use was intended.

Using the h-index for assessing single publications

“…[9]). Researchers frequently get acquainted with publications by finding them cited in other papers, and it is no secret, either, that 'second-hand' informations are often cited without even consulting the original source (as it can be tracked by studying citation errors propagating by inheritance [10]). …”

Authors as citers over time

“…Awareness of relevant work is favorably considered by editors, referees, and readers; it helps forestall criticism and is advantageous in the pursuit of publication and fame. Projection of this sort would even encompass behavior not mentioned in the schemes but dear to cynics: padding reference lists with items known only through abstracts or titles (Davies, 1970), and stealing the references of others, as shown by the inadvertent lifting of their bibliographic errors (Broadus, 1983;Moed & Vriens, 1989).…”

Citation accuracy in environmental science journals

“…As Broadus (1983) noted, an error in publication date is particularly serious because it can lead to misunderstanding how current or historic a particular study is.…”