[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v64y2013i3p448-454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission

Author

Listed:
  • Petr Heneberg
Abstract
Several independent authors reported a high share of uncited publications, which include those produced by top scientists. This share was repeatedly reported to exceed 10% of the total papers produced, without any explanation of this phenomenon and the lack of difference in uncitedness between average and successful researchers. In this report, we analyze the uncitedness among two independent groups of highly visible scientists (mathematicians represented by Fields medalists, and researchers in physiology or medicine represented by Nobel Prize laureates in the respective field). Analysis of both groups led to the identical conclusion: over 90% of the uncited database records of highly visible scientists can be explained by the inclusion of editorial materials progress reports presented at international meetings (meeting abstracts), discussion items (letters to the editor, discussion), personalia (biographic items), and by errors of omission and commission of the Web of Science (WoS) database and of the citing documents. Only a marginal amount of original articles and reviews were found to be uncited (0.9 and 0.3%, respectively), which is in strong contrast with the previously reported data, which never addressed the document types among the uncited records.

Suggested Citation

  • Petr Heneberg, 2013. "Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(3), pages 448-454, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:64:y:2013:i:3:p:448-454
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.22788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22788
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.22788?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katchanov, Yurij L. & Markova, Yulia V. & Shmatko, Natalia A., 2023. "Uncited papers in the structure of scientific communication," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    2. Elisabeth Maria Schlagberger & Lutz Bornmann & Johann Bauer, 2016. "At what institutions did Nobel laureates do their prize-winning work? An analysis of biographical information on Nobel laureates from 1994 to 2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 723-767, November.
    3. Jeppe Nicolaisen & Tove Faber Frandsen, 2019. "Zero impact: a large-scale study of uncitedness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1227-1254, May.
    4. Pablo Dorta-González & Rafael Suárez-Vega & María Isabel Dorta-González, 2020. "Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2619-2644, September.
    5. John P A Ioannidis & Ioana-Alina Cristea & Kevin W Boyack, 2020. "Work honored by Nobel prizes clusters heavily in a few scientific fields," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-11, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:64:y:2013:i:3:p:448-454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.