Cited by 58scientometrics and bibliometrics researchPsychology Research and BibliometricsWeb visibility and informetrics

Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Part II., The 1953 Watson and Crick article on the structure of DNA

Ahmed, Tanzila, Johnson, Ben, Oppenheim, Charles, Peck, Catherine·2004·Scientometrics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/b:scie.0000041645.60907.57

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the second study, 13 percent of the sample actively used Watson and Crick's (1953) information (4 percent), methods (5 percent), or theory (4 percent), compared to 28 percent in the first study.

    “Whereas in the second study only 13 percent of the sample were actively using Watson and Crick's (1953) information (4 percent), methods (5 percent), or theory (4 percent), a greater proportion (28 percent) of the citations in the first study were made for this purpose (information ¼ 1 percent, methods ¼ 11 percent, theory ¼ 16 percent).”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Ahmed et al. (2004)

  • Only two articles (2 percent) in the sample criticized Watson and Crick's (1953) work.

    “Ahmed et al. (2004) found only two articles (2 percent) criticizing Watson and Crick's (1953) work.”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Ahmed et al. (2004)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ahmed, T., Johnson, B., Oppenheim, C., & Peck, C.
Affiliations
Loughborough University (GB)
Venue
Scientometrics
Published
2004-10
Volume
61
Issue
2
Pages
147-156
ISSN
  • 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2861
OpenAlex
W2057817101
Cited by
58
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3
FWCI
3.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Francis Crick Institute
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
Keywords
highly cited papers, citation analysis, Watson and Crick, DNA double helix, bibliographic errors, history of molecular biology

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