Do citations and impact factors relate to the real numbers in publications? A case study of citation rates, impact, and effect sizes in ecology and evolutionary biology

Scientometrics

Volumn 94, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 675-682

  Lortie, Christopher J ^a   Aarssen, Lonnie W ^b   Budden, Amber E ^c   Leimu, Roosa ^d  

^a YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR ECOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Citations; Ecology; Effect size; Evolutionary biology; Hypothesis testing; Treatments

Indexed keywords

EID: 84872502512     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0822-6     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Aksnes, D. W., & Rip, A. (2009). Researchers' perceptions of citations. Research Policy, 38, 895-905.
2. Barto, E. K., & Rillig, M. (2012). Dissemination biases in ecology: effect sizes matter more than quality. Oikos, 121, 228-235.
3. Csada, R. D., James, P. C., & Espie, R. H. M. (1996). The "file drawer problem" of non-significant results" does it apply to biological research? Oikos, 76, 591-593.
4. Doak, D. F., Estes, J. A., Halpern, B. S., Jacob, U., Lindberg, D. R., Lovvorn, J., et al. (2008). Understanding and predicting ecological dynamics: are major surprises inevitable? Ecology, 89, 952-961.
5. Einav, L., & Yariv, L. (2006). What's in a surname? The effects of surname initials on academic success. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 175-188.
6. Ford, E. D. (2000). Scientific method for ecological research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Ford, E. D., & Ishii, H. (2001). The method of synthesis in ecology. Oikos, 93, 153-160.
8. Kokko, H., & Sutherland, W. J. (1999). What do impact factors tell us? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14, 382-384.
9. Kotiaho, J. S. (1999). Unfamiliar citations breed mistakes. Nature, 400, 307.
10. Lawrence, P. A. (2007). The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology, 17, R583-R585.
11. Leimu, R., Lortie, C. J., Tregenza, T., Koricheva, J., Budden, A. E., & Aarssen, L. W. (2008). Does it pay to have a bigwig as a co-author? Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment6, 410-411.
12. Lortie, C. J., & Callaway, R. M. (2006). Re-analysis of meta-analysis: a test of the stress-gradient hypothesis. Journal of Ecology, 94, 7-16.
13. Mayo, D. G. (1996). Error and the growth of experimental knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
14. Monastersky, R. (2005). The number that's devouring science. The chronicle of higher education, 10, 1-13.
15. Roberts, P. D., Stewart, G. B., & Pullin, A. S. (2006). Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine. Biological conservation. doi: 10. 1016/j. biocon. 2006. 04. 034.
16. SAS. (2012). Jmp 9. 0. 2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
17. Small, H. (2004). Why authors think their papers are highly cited. Scientometrics, 60, 305-316.
18. Song, F., Eastwood, A. J., & Gilbody, S. (2000). Publication and related biases. Health Technological Assessments, 4, 1-115.
19. Treadwell, J. R., Tregar, S. J., Reston, J. T., & Turkelson, C. M. (2007). A system for rating the stability and strength of medical evidence. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6, 52.