Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Sun~mary.-Previous research has shown that, when scientists are rank ordered on the basis of number of publications and the number of publications is then plotted against these ranks, the resulting productivity curves are typically exponential in form. Citations to journal articles were analyzed to show that citations are similarly distributed, with the 10% most frequently cited articles receiving approximately 40% of the citations. Reanalysis of data published by Dennis (1954) suggests that there is little relation between the number of articles published by an author and the number of citations he receives per article.It is a common observation that the greater part of the published research in a given field is contributed by a relatively small percentage of its members. One of the first investigators to point this out was Lotka ( 1926) who also noted that publication curves tended to be exponential in form rather than linear. If researchers are assigned ranks on the basis of number of personal publications and then the number of their publications plotted against their ranks, the difference over ranks tends to be a constant ratio rather than a constant amount. Such curves have been found characteristic of the p~~blication habits of scientists in most research areas (Price, 1963) and typically show that 10% of the scientists in a given field produce close to 50% of the published research.Intuitively, one might expect references to research publications to show a similar distribution, with a few important publications being heavily cited, and a large number being rarely, if ever, referred to. Urquhart (1958) has found such a pattern characteristic of the frequency of library usage of scientific journals but comparable data are not available for individual research papers. Accordingly, articles based on doctoral dissertations and published in rwo psychological journals, the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (JASP) and the journal of Experimental Psychology ( J E P ) , during the years 1950-1952 were listed and citations in other articles appearing during the subsequent ten years tallied. References by an author in later papers to his own dissertation article were nor counted. The final frequencies for the JEP were 48 articles and 214 citations, and for the JASP, 33 papers with 109 citations.The articles were assigned decile ranks in terms of the frequency of subsequent citation and cumulative percentage curves of citations were plotted against these ranks (Fig. 1).A comparison curve based on data reported by Dennis (1954) shows the cumulative percentage of articles produced by a sample of 160 American psychologists who were ranked on the basis of the number of articles which they had published. Both journal citation curves are positively accelerated and closely approximate the productivity curve from Dennis. Clearly, a small number of papers accounts for most of the citations. The articles in the JEP making u p the decile most frequently cited account for 44% of the citations; the top decile in the JASP f...
Sun~mary.-Previous research has shown that, when scientists are rank ordered on the basis of number of publications and the number of publications is then plotted against these ranks, the resulting productivity curves are typically exponential in form. Citations to journal articles were analyzed to show that citations are similarly distributed, with the 10% most frequently cited articles receiving approximately 40% of the citations. Reanalysis of data published by Dennis (1954) suggests that there is little relation between the number of articles published by an author and the number of citations he receives per article.It is a common observation that the greater part of the published research in a given field is contributed by a relatively small percentage of its members. One of the first investigators to point this out was Lotka ( 1926) who also noted that publication curves tended to be exponential in form rather than linear. If researchers are assigned ranks on the basis of number of personal publications and then the number of their publications plotted against their ranks, the difference over ranks tends to be a constant ratio rather than a constant amount. Such curves have been found characteristic of the p~~blication habits of scientists in most research areas (Price, 1963) and typically show that 10% of the scientists in a given field produce close to 50% of the published research.Intuitively, one might expect references to research publications to show a similar distribution, with a few important publications being heavily cited, and a large number being rarely, if ever, referred to. Urquhart (1958) has found such a pattern characteristic of the frequency of library usage of scientific journals but comparable data are not available for individual research papers. Accordingly, articles based on doctoral dissertations and published in rwo psychological journals, the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (JASP) and the journal of Experimental Psychology ( J E P ) , during the years 1950-1952 were listed and citations in other articles appearing during the subsequent ten years tallied. References by an author in later papers to his own dissertation article were nor counted. The final frequencies for the JEP were 48 articles and 214 citations, and for the JASP, 33 papers with 109 citations.The articles were assigned decile ranks in terms of the frequency of subsequent citation and cumulative percentage curves of citations were plotted against these ranks (Fig. 1).A comparison curve based on data reported by Dennis (1954) shows the cumulative percentage of articles produced by a sample of 160 American psychologists who were ranked on the basis of the number of articles which they had published. Both journal citation curves are positively accelerated and closely approximate the productivity curve from Dennis. Clearly, a small number of papers accounts for most of the citations. The articles in the JEP making u p the decile most frequently cited account for 44% of the citations; the top decile in the JASP f...
In the twelve-year period following the publication of Principles of Behavior in 1943, Clark L. Hull was regarded as a leading proponent of systematic behavior theory. By the end of the 1950s, his visibility in the psychological literature had greatly diminished and his contributions to psychological theory were judged by many to have been misguided. Drawing from reviews and assessments of Hull's theorizing which appeared in the period 1943–1960, this paper treats Hull's impact and subsequent decline as inevitable outcomes of the programmatic nature of Hull's behavior theory.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.