Cited by 691Academic Writing and Publishingscientometrics and bibliometrics researchDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies

Referencing as persuasion

Nigel Gilbert, G.·1977·Social Studies of Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/030631277700700112

Cites

11 of 11 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nigel Gilbert, G.
Venue
Social Studies of Science
Published
1977-02
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
113-122
ISSN
  • 0036-8539 (ISSN-L)
  • 0306-3127
  • 1460-3659
OpenAlex
W2171789734
Cited by
691
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 19
FWCI
32.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Studies of Science (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Keywords
referencing, citation, persuasion, epistemic authority, academic writing

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