Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 907

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?

Garfield, E.·1979·Scientometrics
DOI 10.1007/bf02019306
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02019306

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. A. A. JOHNSON, R. B. DAVIS. The Research Productivity of Academic Materials Scientists,Journal of Metals 27 (1975) No. 6, 28–29.
  2. D. SHAPLEY. NSF: A ‘Populist’ Pattern in Metallurgy, Materials Research?Science, 189 (1975) No. 4203, 622–624. · doi:10.1126/science.189.4203.622
  3. C. A. WERT. The Citation Index Revisited,Journal of Metals 27 (1975) No. 12, 20–22.
  4. T. GUSTAFSON, The Controversy Over Peer Review,Science, 190 (1975) No. 4219, 1060–1066. · DOI
  5. D. SHAPLEY, Materials Research: Scientists Show Scant Taste for Breaking Ranks,Science, 191 (1976) No. 4222, 53. · doi:10.1126/science.191.4222.53
  6. R. ROY, Comments on Citation Study of Materials Science Departments,Journal of Metals, 28 (1976) No. 6, 29–30.
  7. G. C. CROSBIE, R. W. HECKEL, Citation Criteria for Ranking Academic Departments,Journal of Metals, 28 (1976) No. 9, 27–28.
  8. N. ARBITER, Letter to the Editor,Journal of Metals, 28 (1976) No. 12, 33.
  9. J. C. AGARWAL, et al., Letter to the Editor,Journal of Metals, 28 (1976) No. 12, 33.
  10. C. J. ALTSTETTER, Letter to the Editor,Journal of Metals, 28 (1976) No. 12, 33–35.
  11. N. WADE, Citation Analysis: A New Tool for Science Administrators,Science, 188 (1975) No. 4187, 429–432. · DOI
  12. Citation Analysis. Letters in response to Wade by M. Klerer, H. J. M. Hanley, J. Arditti, R. E. Machol,Science, 188 (1975) No. 4193, 1064. [N. WADE, Citation Analysis: A New Tool for Science Administrators,Science, 188 (1975) No. 4187, 429–432.] · doi:10.1126/science.188.4193.1064
  13. G. P. KOSHY, The Citeability of a Scientific Paper.Proc. of Northeast Regional Conference of American Institute for Decision Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa., April/May 1976, 224–227.
  14. E. GARFIELD, Is the Ratio Between Number of Citations and Publications Cited a True Constant?Essays of an Information Scientist, Vol. 2, Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1977, 419–421.
  15. E. GARFIELD, Will ISI'sArts & Humanities Citation Index Revolutionize Scholarship?Current Contents, No. 32 (August 8, 1977) 5–9.
  16. I. H. SHER, E. GARFIELD, New Tools for Improving and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Research, inResearch Program Effectiveness, M. C. YOUITS, D. M. GILFORD, R. H. WILCOX, E. STAVELY, H. D. LEMER, (Eds). New York; Gordon and Breach, 1966, p. 135–146.
  17. J. P. MARTINO, Citation Indexing for Research and Development Management,IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-18 (1971) No. 4, 146–151. · DOI
  18. A. E. BAYER, J. FOLGER, Some Correlates of a Citation Measure of Productivity in Science,Sociology of Education, 39 (1966) 381–390. · DOI
  19. J. A. VIRGO, A Statistical Procedure for Evaluating the Importance of Scientific Papers,Library Quarterly 47 (1977) No. 4, 415–430. · DOI
  20. C. L. BERNIER, W. N. GILL, R. G. HUNT, Measures of Excellence of Engineering and Science Departments: A Chemical Engineering Example,Chemical Engineering Education, 9 (1975) 94–97.
  21. G. M. CARTER, Peer Review, Citations, and Biomedical Research Policy: NIH Grants to Medical School Faculty,Rand Report, R-1583-HEW, Santa Monica, California; Rand Corporation, 1974.
  22. A. J. MEADOWS,Communication in Science, London Butterworths, 1974, p. 45.
  23. O. H. LOWRY, N. J. ROSEBROUGH, A. L. FARR, R. J. RANDAL, Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent,Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193 (1951) 265–275. · DOI · Paper page
  24. H. G. SMALL, B. C. GRIFFITH, The Structure of Scientific Literatures, I: Identifying and Graphing Specialties,Science Studies, 4 (1974) 17–40. · DOI · Paper page
  25. B. C. GRIFFITH, H. G. SMALL, J. A. STONEHILL, S. DEY, The Structure of Scientific Literatures, II: Towards a Macro- and Microstructure for Science,Science Studies 4 (1974) 339–365. · DOI · Paper page
  26. R. K. MERTON,On the Shoulders of Giants-A Shandean Postcript, New York, Harcourt Brace & World, 1965, p. 218–219.
  27. J. LEDERBERG, A View of Genetics,Science, 131 (1960) 269–276. · doi:10.1126/science.131.3396.269
  28. E. GARFIELD, I. H. SHER, Citation Indexes in Sociological and Historical Research,American Documentation, 14 (1963) 289–291. · DOI · Paper page
  29. F. NARIN,Evaluative Bibliometrics: The USE of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity, Cherry Hill, N.J.; Computer Horizons, Inc., 1976, p. 500, NTIS-PB252339/AS.
  30. J. R. COLE, S. COLE, The Ortega Hypothesis,Science, 178 (1975) 368–375. · DOI · Paper page
  31. E. GARFIELD, Citation Analysis and the Anti-Vivisection Controversy,Current Contents, No. 17 (April 25, 1977) 5–10.
  32. E. GARFIELD, Citation Analysis and the Anti-Vivisection Controversy. Part II. An Assessment of Lester R. Aronson's Citation Record,Current Contents, No. 48 (November 28, 1977) 5–14.
  33. E. GARFIELD, The 250 Most-Cited Primary Authors, 1961–1975. Part II. The Correlation Between Citedness, Nobel Prizes, and Academy Memberships,Current Contents, No. 50 (December 12, 1977) 5–15.
  34. E. GARFIELD, The 250 Most-Cited Primary Authors, 1961–1975. Part III. Each Author's Most Cited Publication,Current Contents, No. 51 (December 19, 1977) 5–20.
  35. E. GARFIELD, The 300 Most-Cited Authors, 1961–1976, Including Co-Authors at Last. Part I. How the Names Were Selected,Current Contents, No. 28 (July 10, 1978) 5–18.
  36. J. R. COLE, S. COLE,Social Stratification in Science, Chicago; University of Chicago Press, 1973, p. 32–33.
  37. D. de S. PRICE,Little Science, Big Science, New York, Columbia University Press, 1963. · DOI · Paper page
  38. D. de S. PRICE, D. B. BEAVER, Collaboration in an Invisible College,American Psychologist, 21 (1966) 1011–1018. · DOI · Paper page
  39. N. L. GELLER, J. S. CANI, R. E. DAVIES, Lifetime-Citation Rates as a Basis for Comparisons Within a Scientific Field,Proc. of the American Statistical Association. Social Statistics Section, Washington, D. C., 1975, p. 429–433.
  40. N. L. GELLER, J. S. de CANI, R. E. DAVIES, Lifetime-Citation Rates to Compare Scientists' Work,Social Science Research, (in press). · DOI
  41. E. GARFIELD, Caution Urged in the Use of Citation Analysis,Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 2 (1977) No. 4, N84. · doi:10.1016/0968-0004(77)90032-9

Cited by

See all 907

Metadata

Authors
Garfield, E.
Venue
Scientometrics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1979-05
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
359-375
ISSN
  • 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2861
DOI
10.1007/bf02019306
OpenAlex
W2099811601
Cited by
907
References
3
FWCI
5.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02019306
The paper
Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02019306

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.