The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Science of science
Open accessAbstract
The whys and wherefores of SciSci: The science of science (SciSci) is based on a transdisciplinary approach that uses large data sets to study the mechanisms underlying the doing of science—from the choice of a research problem to career trajectories and progress within a field. In a Review, Fortunato et al. explain that the underlying rationale is that with a deeper understanding of the precursors of impactful science, it will be possible to develop systems and policies that improve each scientist's ability to succeed and enhance the prospects of science as a whole. Science , this issue p. eaao0185
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the cumulative nature of scientific research [12] makes the knowledge ecosystem vulnerable to perpetuating errors [13], [14]”
From LLM hallucinations in the wild: Large-scale evidence from non-existent citations (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
In the citing paper
“Specifically, we believe that practices fundamental to the business models of paper mills leave a collaboration fingerprint that can be identified using techniques familiar to the ‘Science of Science’12.”
From Identifying fabricated networks within authorship-for-sale enterprises (2024) · cites this paper as [12]
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
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135 · cited 1×
“Power-law tails can be generated through a cumulative advantage process (74), known as preferential attachment in network science (75), suggesting that the probability of citing a paper grows with the number of citations that it has already collected.”
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720 · cited 2×
“Together, these datadriven efforts complement contributions from related research domains such as the economics (30) and sociology of science (60, 86).”
(1968) · PubMed · Cited by 4,803
The structure of scientific collaboration networks
Newman, M. E. J. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.404 · Cited by 4,550 · cited 1×
“A life-cycle analysis of eight fields (10) shows that successful fields undergo a process of knowledge and social unification that leads to a giant connected component in the collaboration network (104), corresponding to a sizeable group of regular coauthors.”
Price, D. J. D. S. (1963) · Columbia University Press eBooks · doi:10.7312/pric91844 · Cited by 4,400
The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change
Kuhn, T. S. (1977) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226217239.001.0001 · Cited by 3,861
The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1136099 · Cited by 3,615 · cited 3×
“1 million patents reveals a nearly universal shift toward teams in all branches of science (50) (Fig.”
Self-citationPrice, D. J. D. S. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.149.3683.510 · Cited by 3,205
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- N. J. Cooke M. L. Hilton Eds. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science (National Academies Press 2015).
- H. F. Moed Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation (Springer 2010).
- J. R. Cole H. Zuckerman in The Idea of Social Structure: Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton L. A. Coser Ed. (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1975) pp. 139–174.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,002 of 1,002
Design for Science: Proposing an Interactive Circular 2-Level Algorithm
Azevedo, B., Branco, P., & Cunha, F. (2023) · Intelligent systems reference library · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-31360-8_16 · Cited by 1
GeneticFlow: Exploring Scholar Impact with Interactive Visualization
Xiao, F., & Shi, L. (2023) · Visualization · doi:10.1109/vis54172.2023.00022 · Cited by 1
“Understanding and quantifying scholar’s impact are essential for many real-world tasks such as academic award selection, tenure evaluation [26], and academic output inference [8].”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., Uzzi, B., Vespignani, A., Waltman, L., Wang, D., & Barabási, A.-L.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Chicago (US)
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- University of California, Merced (US)
- Northeastern University (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Leiden University (NL)
- Center for Network Science, Central European University, Budapest 1052, Hungary.
- Corresponding author
- Fortunato, Santo
- ORCID
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2018-03-02
- Volume
- 359
- Issue
- 6379
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- PMC
- PMC5949209
- OpenAlex
- W2793071066
- Cited by
- 1,497
- References
- 113
- Citations by year
- 2026: 222 · 2025: 223 · 2024: 223 · 2023: 197 · 2022: 164 · 2021: 180 · 2020: 126 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 43
- FWCI
- 22.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks Open (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH Office of the Director (P01 AG039347, U01CA198934, IIS-0910664)
- NSF Office of the Director (NCSE 1538763, EAGER1566393, NCN CP Supplement 1553044)
- AFOSR (FA9550-15-1-0077, FA9550-15-1-0162, FA9550-17-1-0089)
- European Commission (641191)
- Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-15-1-0364)
- Army Research Office (W911NF-15-1-0577)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- science of science, research output, science policy, scientific careers, research funding, research frontiers
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
