2022
DOI: 10.1080/02691728.2021.2022807
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Misreferencing Practice of Scientists: Inside Researchers’ Sociological and Bibliometric Profiles

Abstract: Scientists, as human beings, sometimes make mistakes. The aim of this case study was to examine the misreferencing practice of scientists. Citations of two documents about the neuroimaging of a dead salmon were collected. A total of 173 references were extracted from Google Scholar and analyzed by both qualitative and quantitative methods. The findings reveal a reference error rate of 93.1%, involving 419 authors. Sociological and bibliometric data about the authors were collected and revealed that referencing… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some researchers might unintentionally overlook pertinent studies due to oversight or limited literature search scope (58). In other instances, there might be a deliberate choice to exclude studies that contradict or diminish the impact of the current research (59). This selective reporting can lead to a skewed understanding of the research landscape and might result in unnecessary repetition of studies or the propagation of incomplete or biased narratives (58).…”
Section: Non-disclosure Of Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some researchers might unintentionally overlook pertinent studies due to oversight or limited literature search scope (58). In other instances, there might be a deliberate choice to exclude studies that contradict or diminish the impact of the current research (59). This selective reporting can lead to a skewed understanding of the research landscape and might result in unnecessary repetition of studies or the propagation of incomplete or biased narratives (58).…”
Section: Non-disclosure Of Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More critically, it can mislead practitioners and athletes who rely on the latest research to inform their practices and decisions. If they are unaware of prior conflicting or supporting evidence, they might adopt strategies or interventions based on incomplete information (59).…”
Section: Non-disclosure Of Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%