Search results

The use of law reports as a source for data on citation patterns in the courts of law has been pioneered in the United States and to some extent in Canada. Very little work has been undertaken within the English legal system until now. The difficulties faced are noted: the complexity of the court structures and the law reporting system, but above all the limitations of using law reports rather than the original case transcripts which are difficult to obtain. A citation file was built from the citations included in all the issues of fifty‐eight different law report titles issued during 1985. Since there is a degree of duplication in coverage of cases between the law report publications, 5,260 versions of 2,451 unique cases were discovered, yielding a file of 25,868 citations (excluding those to statutory materials). The file was reduced to 11,159 citations (excluding those to statutory materials) by selecting only the longest versions, according to the number of words, of each of the 2,451 cases. Analyses are presented on the general characteristics of the citation file (the proportion of citations to each of twenty‐four different material types), the frequency of citation to statutory materials, case law and other materials (each cross‐tabulated by citing court, subject matter of the citing case and, except for statutory materials, whether the citation occurred in argument by counsel only or in the judgement). For case law only further analyses were performed to identify the jurisdiction of cited cases, self citation practice by different courts, the ageing of authority, the law report titles from which cited cases were taken, the use of unreported cases, and the occurrence of cases without citations to earlier case law.

In scholarly publications, citations play an essential epistemic role in creating and disseminating knowledge. Conversely, the use of problematic citations impedes the growth of knowledge, contaminates the knowledge base and disserves science. This study investigates the presence of problematic citations in the works of business ethics scholars.

The authors investigated two types of problematic citations: inaccurate citations and plagiarized citations. For this, 1,200 randomly selected citations from three leading business ethics journals were assessed based on: (1) referenced journal errors, (2) article title errors and (3) author name errors. Other papers that replicated the same title errors were identified.

Of the citations in the examined business ethics journals, 21.42% have at least one error. Of particular concern are the citation errors in article titles, where 3.75% of examined citations have minor errors and another 3.75% display major errors – 7.5% in total. Two-thirds of minor and major title errors were repeatedly replicated in previous and ensuing publications, which confirms the presence of citation plagiarism. An average article published in a business ethics journal contains at least three plagiarized citations. Even though business ethics fares well compared to other disciplines, a situation where every fifth citation is problematic is unacceptable.

Business ethics scholars are not immune to the use of problematic citations, and it is unlikely that attempting to improve researchers' awareness of the unethicality of this behavior will bring a desirable outcome.

Identifying that problematic citations exist in the business ethics literature is novel because it is expected that these researchers would not condone this practice.

This paper aims at reviewing the extant knowledge management (KM) research field within a strategic alliance context to understand the historical roots, its temporal progression, current state and potential future in a meaningful way.

Data for this study was retrieved from the Scopus database using a systematic literature search process. The bibliometric characteristics of 393 research documents were analyzed using bibliometric and structured network analysis.

The findings of the study suggest that the publication in the field have been growing with an average rate of 8.48%. This analysis also lists the most productive and impactful authors, main outlets, and the most impactful secondary and primary publication in the field. In addition, the conceptual and intellectual structure of the research field was constructed and discussed.

This paper uses an objective and quantitative approach by reviewing the related publications and virtually included all the relevant publications in the analysis, which was seen to be uneconomical when doing traditional literature reviews.

Business process management (BPM) has attracted much focus throughout the years, yet there have been calls questioning the future of BPM. The purpose of this paper is to explore the current state of the field through a dynamic literature review and identify the main challenges for its future development.

A dynamic co-citation network analysis identifies the “evolution” of knowledge of BPM and the most influential works. The results present the developed BPM subthemes in the form of clusters.

The focus within the field has shifted from facilitating wide-ranging business performance improvements to creating introverted optimizations within a particular BPM subgroup. The BPM field has thus experienced strong fragmentation throughout the years and has accrued into self-fueling subareas of BPM research such as business process modeling and workflow management. Those subareas often neglect related disciplines in other management, process modeling and organizational improvement fields.

The study is limited by the initial keyword choice of the authors. The subsequent co-citation analysis ameliorates the subjectivity since it produces a data set and contributions based on references.

A new combination of historical development and the state-of-the-art of the BPM field, by employing a co-citation and cluster analysis. This dynamic literature review presents the current state of the theoretical core and attempts to identify the crossroads that BPM has reached. The study can be replicated in the future to track the changes in the field.

Literature practices represent the process leading up to the citation of a source, and consist of the selection, reading and citing of sources. The purpose of this paper is to explore possible factors that might influence researchers during this process and discover possible consequences of researchers’ citation behaviours.

In this exploratory study, various factors which could influence literature practices were explored via a questionnaire amongst 112 researchers. Participants were first authors of articles published in 2016 in one of five different journals within the disciplines of experimental psychology, educational sciences and social psychology. Academic positions of the participants ranged from PhD student to full professor.

Frequencies and percentages showed that researchers seemed to be influenced in their literature practices by various factors, such as editors suggesting articles and motivation to cite. Additionally, a high percentage of researchers reported taking shortcuts when citing articles (e.g. using secondary citations and reading selectively). Logistic regression did not reveal a clear relationship between academic work experience and research practices.

Seeing that researchers seem to be influenced by a variety of factors in their literature practices, the scientific community might benefit from better citation practices and guidelines in order to provide more structure to the process of literature practices.

This paper provides first insights into researchers’ literature practices. Possible reasons for problems with citation accuracy and replicating research findings are highlighted. Opportunities for further research on the topic of citation behaviours are presented.

This paper seeks to investigate the use of engineering conference papers by examining where the papers presented at the Stapp Car Crash Conference from 1980‐2005 were subsequently cited. Also, to examine whether the references were made to the conference paper or to the individual, the SAE Technical Paper, the second publication method. It also aims to study whether the citations were made to the lead author or secondary authors.

The individual papers were searched in Science Citation Index on the Web of Science platform using the “Cited author” search and the appropriate work(s) were selected using the “Cited work” information. The number of citations to each paper was recorded and the bibliographic information from the citing articles for the “top cited” articles were retrieved and examined to determine the subject focus of the citing journals.

Almost two‐thirds of the papers from the Stapp Car Crash Conference were cited at least once, mirroring that of engineering journal articles. These citations appear in journals representing a wide variety of disciplines besides engineering including journals covering “clinical neurology”, “orthopedics”, “rehabilitation” and “surgery”. The majority of citations (92 per cent) were found to be to the lead author and approximately 85 per cent were cited as papers within the conference proceedings with the remaining papers cited as individual technical papers.

The results on the impact and use of engineering conference papers, especially the results in terms of author and material type, will provide valuable insight into this literature, providing librarians and researchers with a better understanding of their use in the advancement of research and scholarship.

States that there has been a recent explosion in the publication of reference works in the field of African American studies which indicates the mature field of scholarship being achieved in this area. Provides a bibliographic guide for those wishing to identify and use research tools for studying African American literature.

The merits and demerits of existing techniques for the selection of journals are discussed. This discussion brings out the fact that the use of journals characterizes their importance. A model for the ideal selection of journals is presented. A canon of decreasing usefulness is invoked to determine journal priorities and to formulate guidelines for selection. The highest priority in the matter of journal selection should be given to those journals which are highly cited, abstracted, and used.

The wide adoption of web-scale discovery tools calls into question the usefulness and viability of traditional subject indexes. This study examines this question of usefulness in the context of the discipline of literary studies. To what extent can researchers rely on the primary database devoted to language and literature study to discover relevant scholarship, and how does the database's performance compare to other common search tools?

The study uses a random sample of citations from articles published in the flagship journal, PMLA, to see how well the sources cited by literature scholars are covered in various search tools, including the MLA International Bibliography.

Of the search tools investigated, Google Scholar found the largest number of citations, even when limiting to literary scholarship. However, the eclecticism of citations suggests that scholars benefit from using a variety of search tools and methods.

Although other studies have looked at discoverability in certain subject areas, this one focuses on literary studies. An understanding of the relative coverage of different search tools can inform librarian practices and recommendations.

The purpose of this paper is to find out which research topics and methods in information science (IS) articles are used in other disciplines as indicated by citations.

The study analyzes citations to articles in IS published in 31 scholarly IS journals in 2015. The study employs content analysis of articles published in 2015 receiving citations from publication venues representing IS and other disciplines in the citation window 2015–2021. The unit of analysis is the article-citing discipline pair. The data set consists of 1178 IS articles cited altogether 25 K times through 5 K publication venues. Each citation is seen as a contribution to the citing document’s discipline by the cited article, which represents some IS subareas and methodologies, and the author team's disciplinary composition, which is inferred from the authors’ affiliations.

The results show that the citation profiles of disciplines vary depending on research topics, methods and author disciplines. Disciplines external to IS are typically cited in IS articles authored by scholars with the same background. Thus, the export of ideas from IS to other disciplines is evidently smaller than the earlier findings claim. IS should not be credited for contributions by other disciplines published in IS literature.

This study is the first to analyze which research topics and methods in the articles of IS are of use in other disciplines as indicated by citations.