Frequency and functional use of cited documents in information science

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine factors which may explain frequency and nature of use of documents in citing document texts over time. Articles published in the Journal of the American Society for lnformatlon Science in 1972, 1973, and 1974 were searched on SciSearch to derive two sample groups. One group was frequently cited; the other was infrequently cited. The functional uses of the sample document groups were examined by four classification taxonomies In 417 citing contexts. The patterns of frequency of use, multiple use, and functional use were examined over time. The citation levels of documents citing the two sample groups were examined as well. When measured by functional citation taxonomles, frequently and infrequently cited documents were not used for significantly different functions. Frequently cited documents, however, seemed more tightly linked (essential) than infrequently cited documents to the documents in which they were used. While frequently cited documents were not judged more useful than infrequently cited documents Initially, they were used at a stable higher level over a longer period. Infrequently cited documents were used immediately following publication and then their use rapidly diminished. The repeated use of infrequently cited documents within documents tended to decrease over time while the repeated use of frequently cited documents tended to increase. Frequently cited articles were used for different functions in the period immediately following publication and a later time period. Infrequently cited articles were used with greater consistency In the two time periods.

Co‐Authorship in Management and Organizational Studies: An Empirical and Network Analysis*

“…Thus, the scientific community cites more frequently those papers that have a ‘higher acknowledgment’, which is (to some extent) a reflection of the quality of the research. Many citation analysers have assumed that a researcher citing a work has judged the work to be useful, and hence of some quality (Hooten, 1991; Narin and Moll, 1977). Moreover, the literature points that the co‐authored papers present a higher quality than those which are single‐authored (Laband and Tollison, 2000), which leads to a higher impact (Katz and Martín, 1997; Laband, 1987; Lawani, 1986), although direct evidence on the relationship between co‐authorship and article quality is contradictory (Barnett et al., 1988).…”

A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study II. Decisions at the reading and citing stages

“…Several excellent reviews have summarized the library and information science literature related to citing (Smith, 1981;Cronin, 1984;White & Mc-Cain, 1989;Borgman, 1990;Liu, 1993). Because this study is interested in the reasons why researchers choose to cite or not cite documents used during their research, the studies especially relevant to this article focus on developing typologies of motivations for citing (Bonzi & Snyder, 1991;Brooks, 1985Brooks, , 1986Cano, 1989;Chubin & Moitra, 1975;Frost, 1979;Hodges, 1978;Hooten, 1991;Moravcsik & Murugesan, 1978;Spiegel-Rosing, 1977;Peritz, 1983;Vinkler, 1987;Snyder & Bonzi, 1989). Also relevant are the few studies that have looked at citing behavior related to negative decisions (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1988;Vinkler, 1987).…”

Characterizing the frequency of repeated citations: The effects of journal, subject area, and self-citation

“…Some documents may only ever be mono-cited, while others may have a large number of documents which cite it repeatedly. This behavior may also be expected to change with time (Hooten, 1991). For example, repeated citation of a document may be more common shortly after publication and then become less frequent as the work is incorporated into the accepted knowledge of a discipline.…”