Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An analysis of citation functions in the humanities and social sciences research from the perspective of problematic citation analysis assumptions

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Citation analyses are based on two questionable assumptions that significantly influence the value of citation count: the equal contribution assumption (i.e., each citation contributes equally to the citing paper) and the positive endorsement assumption (i.e., each citation is viewed as an endorsement from the citing paper to the cited work). This study employed a citation context analysis approach to examine the distributions of essential versus perfunctory citations as well as confirmative versus negational citations in humanities and social sciences (H&SS) research articles to determine to what extent the two problematic assumptions affect the validity of citation analyses in those fields. The sample comprises 360 articles representing six subject areas: Chinese literature, history, arts (i.e., the humanities subjects); sociology, economics, and psychology (i.e., the social sciences subjects). Excluding citations to primary sources—e.g., manuscripts, archival materials, monographs that were the subjects of study rather than information sources, a total of 25,617 in-text bibliographic citations were analyzed. The findings show that the distributions of citation functions for those six subject fields were all significantly different, meaning that disciplinary differences exist in H&SS citations. Also, for the H&SS fields, perfunctory citations may have inflated the contribution of the cited works much more than negational citations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmed, T., Johnson, B., Oppenheim, C., & Peck, C. (2004). Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Part II. The 1953 Watson and Crick article on the structure of DNA. Scientometrics, 61(2), 147–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, T. A. (1985). Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 36(4), 223–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano, V. (1989). Citation behavior: Classification, utility, and location. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(4), 284–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chubin, D. E., & Moitra, S. D. (1975). Content analysis of references: Adjunct or alternative to citation counting? Social Studies of Science, 5(4), 423–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, B. (1982). Norms and functions in citation: The view of journal editors and referees in psychology. Social Science Information Studies, 2, 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullars, J. M. (1998). Citation characteristics of English-language monographs in philosophy. Library & Information Science Research, 20(1), 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, A., & Bonaccorsi, A. (2016). How robust is journal rating in humanities and social sciences? Evidence from a large-scale, multi-method exercise. Research Evaluation, 25(3), 279–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, C. O. (1979). The use of citations in literary research: A preliminary classification of citation functions. The Library Quarterly, 49(4), 399–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, C. O. (1989). The literature of online public access catalog, 1980–1985: An analysis of citation patterns. Library Resources and Technical Services, 33(4), 344–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1965). Can citation indexing be automated? In M. E. Stevens, V. E. Giuliano, & L. B. Heilprin (Eds.), Statistical Association Methods for Mechanized Documentation, Symposium Proceedings, Washington, 1964, National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication 269 (pp. 189–192). Washington, D.C: National Bureau of Standards.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, N. (2009). An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 497–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellqvist, B. (2010). Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 310–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, M.-H., & Chang, Y.-W. (2006). Performance indicators for evaluation of humanities and social sciences researchers. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 4(1/2), 17–47.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, M.-H., & Chang, Y.-W. (2008). Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1819–1828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 8–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. (2004). The motivation for citing specific references by social scientists in Korea: The phenomenon of co-existing references. Scientometrics, 59(1), 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krampen, G., Becker, R., Wahner, U., & Montada, L. (2007). On the validity of citation counting in science evaluation: Content analyses of references and citations in psychological publications. Scientometrics, 71(2), 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krampen, G., Burkard, P., & Montada, L. (2002). Wissenschaftsforschung in der Psychologie. Verlag für Psychologie: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren, L. (2011). If Robert Merton said it, it must be true: A citation analysis in the field of performance measurement. Evaluation, 17(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (1996). Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 36(3), 435–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, M. J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science, 5(1), 86–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murugesan, P., & Moravcsik, M. J. (1978). Variation of the nature of citation measures with journals and scientific specialties. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 29(3), 141–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, C., & Renn, S. P. (1978). Highly cited old papers and reasons why they continue to be cited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29, 225–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peritz, B. (1983). A classification of citation roles for the social sciences and related fields. Scientometrics, 5, 303–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (1982). Citation context analysis. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 287–310). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stremersch, S., Camacho, N., Vanneste, S., & Verniers, I. (2015). Unraveling scientific impact: Citation types in marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(1), 64–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C., under Grants Nos. MOST 107-2221-E-011-105, NSC 102-2410-H-002-202-, and Ministry of Education, Taiwan, R.O.C., under Grant No. NTU-107L900204.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Library and Information Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chi-Shiou Lin

  2. Center for Research in Econometric Theory and Applications (CRETA), National Taiwan University, 1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Road, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan

    Chi-Shiou Lin

Authors
  1. Chi-Shiou Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chi-Shiou Lin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, CS. An analysis of citation functions in the humanities and social sciences research from the perspective of problematic citation analysis assumptions. Scientometrics 116, 797–813 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2770-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2770-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation