Reference accuracy in library and information science journals

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to determine the percentage of reference errors and type of errors in four library and information science (LIS) journals.Design/methodology/approachResearch articles from issues published in 2007 were selected for analysis. The references were compared to online freely available tables of contents. The errors identified were categorised into six elements: journal title; author(s); article title; publication year; volume; and page numbers.FindingsThe highest percentage of reference errors was 49.1 percent (Information and Management). The overall error rates were: author (56 percent), page number (22 percent), article title (15 percent), volume (3 percent), publication year (2 percent) and journal title (2 percent).Research limitations/implicationsThe tables of contents (ToCs) used to compare the article references may not have correctly recorded the article details. Not all journal references could be reviewed as not all journal ToCs are available online. This one year, 2007, may not accurately reflect the citation accuracy of the journal in other years. This study did not differentiate between errors that would prevent the location of the article and those that could still be located with perseverance.Practical implicationsError rates in these LIS journals are considerable. The current method of authors being responsible for the references is not resulting in accurate bibliographic information.Originality/valueBased on the findings, possible solutions are suggested that could improve the accuracy of references.

A modern, simplified citation style and student response

“…Davies' (2012) study of journal citations in information science found an error rate of 45 per cent. Postgraduate students in library science at Loughborough University had a citation error rate of nearly 25 per cent, and 80 per cent of their bibliographies had at least one error according to a study done by Clarke and Oppenheim (2006).…”

How accurate are cited references in Iranian peer‐reviewed journals?

“…Problems with referencing are a concern in all scientific disciplines. They have been recorded in medical journals as long ago as 1880 (Davids et al ., ), and other disciplines have reported increasing error rates in citation accuracy in their own scholarly journals (Zalcberg, ; Wright & Armstrong, ) – although citation and quotation accuracy differ from one field to another (Drake et al ., ; Davies, ; Lopresti, ). Accordingly, error rates differ significantly, and studies reporting the prevalence of major errors range from 4% to 74% in different disciplines (Buchanan, ; Aronsky, Ransom, & Robinson, ; Gosling, Cameron, & Gibbons, ).…”

“…Problems with referencing are a concern in all scientific disciplines. They have been recorded in medical journals as long ago as quotation accuracy differ from one field to another (Drake et al, 2013;Davies, 2012;Lopresti, 2010). Accordingly, error rates differ significantly, and studies reporting the prevalence of major errors range from 4% to 74% in different disciplines (Buchanan, 2006;Aronsky, Ransom, & Robinson, 2005;Gosling, Cameron, & Gibbons, 2004).…”

RefConcile – Automated Online Reconciliation of Bibliographic References

“…A more common reason for differences, however, are typographical errors. Davies [6] found that such errors are not equally frequent throughout a bibliographic reference: (1) misspellings are more likely to occur in the middle or at the end of a word rather than at the beginning; in particular, the first letter of a word is nearly always correct; (2) misspellings are most likely to occur in author names, somewhat less likely in titles, and least likely in journal and publisher names. We exploit these findings in the design of our blocking technique.…”

“…Because all but the first author can be substituted with "et al", RefConcile uses only the first author. Note that, while the order of the individual parts of a name can vary, author names as a whole exhibit little variation, especially the first few authors [6].…”