Throwaway Citation of Prior Work Creates Risk of Bad HCI Research

Marshall, Joe; Linehan, Conor; Spence, Jocelyn; Rennick-Egglestone, Stefan

doi:10.1145/3027063.3052751

Cited by 23 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings also reflect the disquieting tendency of "throwaway citation of prior work", a serious concern already addressed by Marshall et al [46]. It can be argued that the undesirable practice of skimming related work might be caused by the pressure of citing signature papers in a specific area -an observation that many researchers could probably attest, that reviewers often comment on the omission of some "must-cite" papers, even though they may not be entirely relevant.…”

Section: Importance Of Correct Citationsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…• We lend further support to the criticism of poor research practice of citing prior work [45,46]. We identify an even more basic problem with regards to proper citations, especially manuscripts in preparation, thereby inferring implications for different roles -author, researcher, reviewer, and educators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…Educators: The specific case of the GEQ made us ponder the implication for teaching next-generation HCI researchers, especially how to treat resources without a formal publication status. We amplify the call that researchers should critically analyse the quality of the work to be cited [45,46] and cite it properly. Furthermore, it is crucial that statistical findings be reported systematically to ensure transparency and accountability of the work.…”

Section: Manuscript In Preparationmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic Review and Validation of the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) – Implications for Citation and Reporting Practice

Law¹,

Brühlmann²,

Mekler³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite lacking a formal peer-reviewed publication, the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) is widely applied in games research, which might risk the proliferation of erroneous study implications. This concern motivated us to conduct a systematic literature review of 73 publications, analysing how and why the GEQ and its variants have been employed in current research. Besides inconsistent reporting of psychometric properties, we found that misleading citation practices with regards to the source, rationale and number of items reported were prevalent, which in part seem to stem from confusion over the “manuscript in preparation” status. Additionally, we present the results of a validation study (N = 633), which found no evidence for the originally postulated 7-factor structure of the GEQ. Based on these findings, we discuss the challenges inherent to the “manuscript in preparation” status and provide recommendations for authors, researchers, educators, and reviewers on how to improve reporting, citation and publication practices.

show abstract

Section: Importance Of Correct Citationsupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Section: Manuscript In Preparationmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic Review and Validation of the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) – Implications for Citation and Reporting Practice

Law¹,

Brühlmann²,

Mekler³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main outcomes concern the dominance of a relatively small group of leading researchers and the emergence of research fields such as Design, Health and Well-being, and Education. Marshall et al [29] analysed over 3,000 citations from 69 papers at CHI2016 and criticised the superficial way researchers talk about previous research in CHI and the practice of "throwaway citations" without critical engagement. Koumaditis and Hussain [30] presented a bibliographic analysis of 962 publications on HCI during 1969-2017, in which they identified a core set of forty-six representative publications, four main thematic areas, and several recent trends concerning workplaces, sensors, and wearables.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of IJHCS and CHI: A quantitative analysis

Mannocci

Osborne²,

Motta³

2019

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we focus on the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (IJHCS) as a domain of analysis, to gain insights about its evolution in the past 50 years and what this evolution tells us about the research landscape associated with the journal. To this purpose we use techniques from the field of Science of Science and analyse the relevant scholarly data to identify a variety of phenomena, including significant geopolitical patterns, the key trends that emerge from a topic-centric analysis, and the insights that can be drawn from an analysis of citation data. Because the area of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) has always been a central focus for IJHCS, we also include in the analysis the CHI conference, which is the premiere scientific venue in HCI. Analysing both venues provides more data points to our study and allows us to consider two alternative viewpoints on the evolution of HCI research.

show abstract

“…This could have significant implications for decisions to accept manuscripts at venues like CHI, which, in turn, have implications for things like promotion & tenure and research funding. However, it is also important to continue to build on existing work in the field when it comes to citation classification (34).…”

Section: Citation Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study of Citation Motivations in HCI Research

Beck¹,

Sandbulte²,

Neupane³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What paper should be cited where, and why? Gaining insight into citation practices in HCI can enrich our understanding of the structure of research, as well as social and political factors that influence knowledge production. Recent research into HCI citation practices have identified problematic trends: inaccurate citing and a lack of critical citations. Directly investigating authors' motivations for citing can provide a fuller picture of citation practices. It can help us understand HCI research as a social system and develop a theory of citing. We report an interview study designed to identify authors' motivations to cite. We found three primary motivations: affirming personal relationships, building intellectual narratives, and serving strategic objectives. We discuss our findings from a social constructivist perspective of citation practices. In addition, we explore how these findings can strengthen efforts to write CHI papers. Finally, we outline steps to develop a theory of citing in HCI research.

show abstract

Throwaway Citation of Prior Work Creates Risk of Bad HCI Research

Cited by 23 publications

References 13 publications

Systematic Review and Validation of the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) – Implications for Citation and Reporting Practice

Systematic Review and Validation of the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) – Implications for Citation and Reporting Practice

The evolution of IJHCS and CHI: A quantitative analysis

A Study of Citation Motivations in HCI Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About