CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 357scientometrics and bibliometrics researchWeb visibility and informetricsPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

Content Analysis of References: Adjunct or Alternative to Citation Counting?

Chubin, Daryl E., Moitra, Soumyo D.·1975·Social Studies of Science
DOI 10.1177/030631277500500403
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/030631277500500403

Cites

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?

  • Chubin and Moitra (1975) found only very low percentages of negational citations (6 percent and 4 percent).

    “Chubin and Moitra (1975) found only very low percentages of negational citations (6 percent and 4 percent).”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Chubin and Moitra (1975)

  • In theoretical high energy physics, papers cited as partial negational were highly cited immediately after publication and then declined rapidly, whereas papers cited as affirmative essential did not show that course.

    “For works that had been cited in the form of partial negational citations, it was noteworthy that they were highly cited immediately after publication, and then there was a rapid rate of decay (decline in citations to these sources). Papers that had been cited in the form of affirmative essential citations did not show that kind of course.”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Chubin and Moitra (1975)

  • About one-fifth of the citations were found to be affirmative perfunctory citations.

    “About one-fifth of the citations were found to be affirmative perfunctory citations.”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Chubin and Moitra (1975)

  • Chubin and Moitra (1975) reached similar results: citations were most frequently affirmative basic essential (27 percent and 13 percent) or affirmative subsidiary essential (13 percent and 34 percent), and affirmative additional supplementary citations (32 percent) were also made.

    “Chubin and Moitra reached similar results: the citations made by the scientists in letters and full-length articles were most frequently affirmative basic essential (27 percent and 13 percent) or affirmative subsidiary essential (13 percent and 34 percent) citations, and affirmative additional supplementary citations (32 percent) were also made”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Chubin and Moitra (1975)

  • Most published content analyses provide no operational definition for the judgment tasks and report no reliability coefficient for the decisions made by judges.

    “Most published content analyses provide no operational definition for the judgment tasks and report no reliability coefficient for the decisions made by judges (e.g. Chubin and Moitra, 1975; Spiegel-Ro ¨sing, 1977).”

    From What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008) · cites this paper as Chubin and Moitra, 1975

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chubin, D. E., & Moitra, S. D.
ORCID
Chubin, Daryl E.
Venue
Social Studies of Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1975-11
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
423-441
ISSN
  • 0036-8539 (ISSN-L)
  • 0306-3127
  • 1460-3659
DOI
10.1177/030631277500500403
OpenAlex
W1980282589
Cited by
357
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 10
FWCI
12.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Social Studies of Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
Keywords
citation analysis, citation counting, bibliometric analysis, research evaluation, bibliographic references

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