Citation Context Analysis
Citation context analysis looks past the bare count of citations to ask why and how a work is cited, by reading the text surrounding each in-text reference and classifying its function, sentiment, and content. Where ordinary citation counting treats every reference as an equal vote, this method recognizes that citations differ: some are central to a paper's argument and others merely perfunctory, some confirm a cited finding and others dispute it, some use a method and others only mention a concept. Moravcsik and Murugesan's 1975 study of theoretical physics introduced the now-classic functional distinctions (conceptual versus operational, organic versus perfunctory, evolutionary versus juxtapositional, confirmative versus negational) and found that a large share of citations were perfunctory, casting doubt on citation counts as pure quality measures. Tahamtan and Bornmann's review situates this work within the broader question of what citation counts actually measure.
원본 기록
방법의 원본 기록에서 그대로 복사된 인용입니다. 이로부터 수준별 검증이 추론되지 않습니다.
- Moravcsik, M. J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some Results on the Function and Quality of Citations. Social Studies of Science, 5(1), 86-92. · DOI 10.1177/030631277500500106
- Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2019). What do citation counts measure? An updated review of studies on citations in scientific documents published between 2006 and 2018. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1635-1684. · DOI 10.1007/s11192-019-03243-4
큐레이션된 주장
각각 자체 평가와 함께 증거 원장에 유지된 주장입니다.
원장에 주장 평가가 없는 경우 이 보기에서는 주장 평가를 만들지 않습니다.
관련 방법
방법 그래프에서 생성되었으며 기계가 제안한 관계로 표시됩니다 — 증거 주장이 추론되지 않습니다.