2007
The influence of references per paper in the SCI to Impact Factors and the Matthew Effect
Abstract: Abstract:All references data was extracted from the annual volumes of the CD-Edition of Science Citation Index (SCI) and the web of science of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), the journal citation and self-citation data extracted from the journal Citation Report (JCR), the self-citing rate and self-cited rate calculated based on the JCR method. To determine the trend of mean value of references per paper throughout 1970-2005, a total number of 10,000 records were randomly chosen for each year of…
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
41
7
6
5
Citation Types
7
33
0
0
Year Published
2008
2025
Publication Types
Select...
42
8
5
1
Relationship
0
56
Authors
Journals
Cited by 56 publications
(40 citation statements)
References 6 publications
7
33
0
0
“…The most remarkable feature in Table 2 is that the journal self-cited rate is negatively correlated with the impact factor for both Chinese and world journals, with the correlation coefficients −0.223 and −0.212, respectively. This finding is consistent with the result of Biglu [9] , who found that the self-cited rate has a negative correlation with impact factor. Biglu hence pointed out that the journals with lower impact factor tend to be cited more by themselves [9] .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The most remarkable feature in Table 2 is that the journal self-cited rate is negatively correlated with the impact factor for both Chinese and world journals, with the correlation coefficients −0.223 and −0.212, respectively. This finding is consistent with the result of Biglu [9] , who found that the self-cited rate has a negative correlation with impact factor. Biglu hence pointed out that the journals with lower impact factor tend to be cited more by themselves [9] .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…This finding is consistent with the result of Biglu [9] , who found that the self-cited rate has a negative correlation with impact factor. Biglu hence pointed out that the journals with lower impact factor tend to be cited more by themselves [9] . In what follows, we shall give an explanation of the negative correlation coefficients.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The model power-law exponent is then fixed by the relationship γ = 1 + 1/c. Our best fit of dataset 1 gives a value of n = 17.3 ± 0.3, in approximate agreement with the independent estimate of 15.01 found for papers published in 1980 [34]. Also, our predicted value of γ = 3.20 ± 0.02 agrees with the best-fit power-law exponent previously found by Clauset, of γ = 3.16 [8].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…One parameter of the model, n, is the average number of citations given out per paper. Our best-fit value of n is consistent with an independent, empirical measure of it made by Biglu [34]. Our other parameter, c, defines the power-law exponent, γ = 1 + 1/c, which is in agreement with data previously evaluated in [8].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…One variable in which we observed relatively little growth was the number of literature citations per article. Our results are consistent with previous studies also showing increasing trends over time in the number of references per publication across different fields [ 18 , 26 , 27 , 48 – 51 ], although decreasing trends have also been documented [ 49 ]. However, the small increase in this parameter is paradoxical given the increasing size of the scientific literature [ 18 , 21 , 22 ] and the need for referencing the increasing number of techniques used in each article.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
