There are many factors that affect how often a paper is cited. One is certainly whether it is a quality paper, published in a quality journal. But there are other factors, as well, such as:

• How many other papers have addressed a similar research problem
• How easy it is to find the paper via search engines
• Whether a full text (or pre-press) version is available without paying fees

Dear Colleague

Yes, the citation number is an important index of good paper, However, this cannot be generalized.

1. The self citation is an important way to increase the number of citations

2. The citation of the paper should be in the appropriate place

Best regard

Faiza - Salim offers a good response. It's one of the indicators of quality but, on its own, does not necessarily indicate overall quality. There will always be examples of quality papers that have low citation - and poor quality papers that have high citation. It often depends, as Salim states, where the papers are submitted/located.

Each scientific journal has its own criteria for citation and the number of citations is an important factor for the quality of the research and the journal

There are many factors that affect how often a paper is cited. One is certainly whether it is a quality paper, published in a quality journal. But there are other factors, as well, such as:

• How many other papers have addressed a similar research problem
• How easy it is to find the paper via search engines
• Whether a full text (or pre-press) version is available without paying fees

Citing an article means that the currents authors have found a use for the material covered in that originals source. When an article is highly cited, this means that many others have found something noteworthy in it.

I would not worry much about whether self-citation has an impact, because this should be obvious, and it would be difficult to cite one's self so often that it made a notable difference in overall counts.

I would also not worry about requirements that authors cite articles from the journal in which they wish to publish, because such requests are not only rare but also unlikely to raise the citation counts for any particular article.

Thank you for your answers, in my humble opinion,

1. the number of citations is beneficial especially for the journal, since in the majority of cases the researcher loses these rights after publication, and the journal will own the article.

2. the number of citations also depends on the journal and not necessarily on the quality of work: - there are journals that give access to the article, then other journals do not give access to the article; - researchers usually look for articles in journals rated A or in journals in which they wish to publish their articles, to increase their chances for publication ;

3. some researchers base on references cited in a one article,

4. other researchers look for articles by leading specialists or the most recent articles.

5. finally, there are several factors to boost an article, and its depends much more on the journal, and on the reader

6. the author must make an effort to share his article so that it will be cited but after asking the permission of the journal

You are right. But citations are a sign of a paper quality that build reputation of author and a journal where it is published.

In my opinion, the key question for citations is whether they must and should be in the work or the inevitable need for quality requires it.

Kosta sotiroski exactly , the researcher must choose the scientific content, after he looks for the journal if it is predatory or not. otherwise quote an article with an impact factor of 30 or 1 it's the same I think

Dear Faiza Alliouche a citation of your research work can be sign of good quality of your article, but it can also indicate that the research topic is popular or that the topic exactly matches that of another researcher.

dear @Frank T.Edelmann , absolutely, but looking for a topic in a journal is not like looking on google. on search engines not all articles can be found (open access, or payment)

Dear Faiza Alliouche it's always advisable to directly read all journals which are important for your field of research in order to keep up with new developments.

Faiza Alliouche Citation is a sign of good quality of a paper. But the full text should be uploaded so that interested scholars get to cite it if necessary.

Dear Itishree Padhi "Citation is a sign of good quality of a paper." Not always! Many articles are cited by others just because their research topic match the new work, no matter what the quality is.

Not always

Sometimes a good paper or a high quality paper has no or less citation in comparison of a weak paper. Generally, a paper on a common issue has more citations. But now a days researchers cite each others' paper just as a cooperation to increase number of citations. It is, therefore hard to link number of citations with quality.

citation is a sign of good project of the research. it is either very updating, or new in the feild, or it may discuss a new idea.

regards

yes

not always but mostly I feel @ T E Frank

Dear Faiza Alliouche citations of your papers are a clear indication that other researchers find your work interesting.

Dear, Faiza Alliouche,

Its not necessary, that the citation of an article is a sign of the good quality of any paper. But it means that one researcher indicates to your paper as a reference review.

Best regards.

In writing the research, we refer to a number of relevant research papers close to the field of research. We choose the research published in a quality scientific journal

Frank T. Edelmann yes , i agree with you

Dear Vishnu Kumar Gupta it also happens quite often that a reviewer asks the author to add more citations.

Nafees Mohammad i agre with you but, what is disappointing, some researchers try to cite just the new articles

I do think that It depends on some criteria such as quality of the paper itself, the paper is provided a novelty in the research erea, the paper used strong analysis to provide quality results and so....

Dear researcher,

The period after publications the most critical stage of scientific research. Therefore, numerous scholars work hard such as (group research or self-citation) to cite their papers whether high or low quality. This is indicators that the paper with a large number of citation is not the only factor to evaluate this paper has high quality. But, it still one of the many factors.

Best regards,

Mahmood

No...not at all

Mahmood A. Al-shareeda exactement, vous avez ajouté un autre cas, merci pour votre bonne contribution

personally I try to mention the main results in my topic even if they found different results than mine, I also quote the oldest ones or rather the first work in my thematic which remains a good reference, but must take into consideration the reliability of results and scientific content in the first place

Dear @Faiza Alliouche Citation of an article depends on so many factors, for example, quality of the article, and the journal in which it got published, its accessibility to other researchers, the number of researchers working in that area, the credibility of the lab where the work was executed, the promotional strategies adopted by the authors as well as the journal, and the like. It is the integration all such variables that determine the final outcome "citation".

Faiza Alliouche

Merci également pour la précieuse question

@Mahmood

pas de quoi avec plaisir , fallait savoir les principaux facteurs pour le choix des articles à citer, malheureusement certains ne prennent pas le temps pour lire els articles , donc ils se contentent des articles cités par d'autres chercheurs

Arbind K. Choudhary you have well explained, thank you for your excellent contribution

Dear Faiza Alliouche and Arbind K. Choudhary often citations just depend on the fact that the references are found on SciFinder.

Dear Frank T. Edelmann Agreed.

Dear Faiza Alliouche getting back to your original question "Citation of an article is it a sign of good quality of a paper ?" I would say from my experience that citation is not necessarily related to the quality of the reported research. Papers are cited when other researchers consider them important previous studies related to their own work. Please note that there are several closely related threads available on RG which could give you many more answers to your question, e.g.:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_a_published_paper_with_zero_citations_irrelevant (1334 answers)

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_most_useful_measure_of_the_quality_of_academic_research_Reads_Recommendations_or_Citations (1,700 answers)

Citation is one of many factors indicating it as a good paper

but no the only factor

Dear Faiza Alliouche

Citations sometimes refer to the hot topic not the quality of the paper.

Also, sometimes citations refer to that the paper is famous in this topic and the paper may have normal quality.

To answer your original question, the number of citations may or may not be a measure of the quality of an article, but it IS a measure of the influence of the paper.

Not necessarily.

I think its good sign of the quality of the knowledge

The most cited papers of me

Impact of gaseous by products in Khartoum Refinery on Environment

And

Comparison between four global assessment methods

Citation is an indicator to measure the quality of the particular article referred by the academic researchers/users.

It is one of the Indicators to measure the quality of article but there are many indicators like content of the topic discussed, reputations of the Journals, recent issues related and how many researchers are referred the particular article also matters.

Mainly RG is considering the Citations are one of the measurements to count the score if the members.

The numbers citations will determine ones h-index and i-index etc.

Most of the reputed Journals are checking the theses indexes for the individuals to make the difference among the research community.

Anyhow, it is good questions and I hope many will attempt to answer it.

Not always ..at present 90 percent citation either self or lobing

I think a citation of the paper is a good sign for the type and results of work.

M.K. Tripathi what is the source of your claim that "at present 90 percent citation either self or lobing" (and what is "lobing")?

Citation of a paper clearly indicates the quality &the contributions a paper makes to knowledge

Dear M.K. Tripathi just like David L Morgan I do not really understand what you mean when you say "at present 90 percent citation either self or lobing". Proper citation of relevant previous work by other researchers is an essential part of scientific publishing. Even self-citations, if not done extensively, is useful and important to put your work into context with previously published papers in the same field. In any case, full credit should be given to the pioneers in a field of research by citing their work.

Citation of a paper means something new with quality.

It is not. A paper may be well written and possesses high quality, what if it addresses a less important issue in the society. On the other, a paper may point to an important issue and not of high quality in itself but it may attract citations repeatedly and continuously due to its an urgent issue in the society. A paper written around Jan to May of 2020 on COVID-19 may receive thousands of citation by December of the year (just few months) whereas, a paper with higher quality and well written since 2015 may only have attracted citation less than 10 till around Dec., 2020.

Not always madam ...citation is just reference made by a person wo write a new research article and mention earlier related work to support or discuss with present

I am agreed with answer of Dear Dr Michael W. Marek 

Dear Faiza Alliouche getting back to the last part of your original question: "some journals require the citation of articles in the journal to be accepted". In our 40+ years of chemical research we never observed such a behavior. No editor of a serious ever asked use to cite more articles from his journal. It makes no sense anyway, as only articles should be cited, which are closely related to the work described in the manuscript.

Dear Frank T. Edelmann ,

I have an opposite result:

Several editors of Information theory journals marked negatively that I do not use articles of their journals.

Study for a hundred years, you will still make mistakes !!!

Dear Frank T. Edelmann ,

Let's leave all the bad things in the past!

I wish you a Happy New Year 2021!

I wish you this year health, happiness, peace and love with your family, a strong vaccine and strong friendship!

It depends on many factors. True, sometimes, the citations are a sign of a good reputation of a paper, but not all the time.

It is. Google scholar citations are even used to give awards for researchers in my institution ( considering H index). I do believe that H index provides a lot of sense than the total number of citations.

Ilija Barukčić

Horandstrasse

DE-26401 Jever

Germany

26.12.2020

Dear all,

Boris Menin wrote:

" ... you will still make mistakes" which is correct and equally the way how science is functioning. We cannot exlcude bias or mistakes from science completely. We need to recogonize mistakes quickly and to reduce the consequences of mistakes as soon as possible.

According to Google Schoolar (Dec 26, 2020),

J. S. Bell's Book "Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics: Collected papers on quantum philosophy"

is quoted more than 6218 times

while Einstein's

"Zur elektrodynamik bewegter körper" (Annalen der physik, 1905)

is cited only 5607 times.

While Einstein's relativity is increasingly being exerpimentally confirmed

the evidence that Bell's inequality/theorem is incorrect and a logical fallacy

is increasing too. Nonetheless, this has no influence on the number of being cited.

I do believe that says it all about the relationship between the number of cites of a publication and the scientific quality of a publication. It appears to be, that subjective believe and pure ideology plays a very important part how much a publication is cited or not.

Because of this and other factors, we have justified reason to be very careful about scientific positions claimed to be proofed as true once and for all.

The number of cites is among other a meausre of the popularity of a publication

and points to some extent to the ideology of an author which is supporting a publication by citing the same but is by far not automatically a guarantee of the scientific quality of the content of a publication.

A publication wich is very popular need not to be scientifically correct and vice versa. A publication which is scientifically correct need not to be automatically very popular.

Ilija Barukčić

Dear Ilija, very right. Stephen Hawking's h-index according to wikipedia is 75 the one of Einstein 40 only, both very low values. Scientists should not allow google scholar and similar to measure their work. Since renaissance times scientists are focused on measuring and quantifying observations to be able to falsify ideas or mathematical models. This approach was very successful, as we all know.

Why not measuring scientific quality by scientific methods as well? Because there is an intrinsic logic contradiction maybe similar to Gödels findings about completeness of Mathematics. He found that completeness can only be decided from outside of Mathematics. Who wants to measure the quality of a new scientific result? An algorithm? Referees, though often scientists themselves? Despite being experts they often enough failed to judge the importance of new results, there are countless examples, e.g. high-temperature superconductivity.

My personal conclusion is: Science is not an automatism or a measureable product or a game (like football) and cannot be measured with scientific methodology. This is perhaps comparable to what Gödel meant with "outside of Mathematics". This may be another example of the "Entscheidungsproblem". This "insight" is common place in other different areas as the arts and economy (Is there a h-index for artists? I doubt. Economy had a big crash in 2008 partially based on totally failing ratings and wrong quantitative models of stock markets and declared itself as not being a quantitative field since). Science is also influenced by too many non-measurable non-scientific factors. Research is not a rational process alone. This seems to be a relieve at first glance but sometimes can be cruel: to be ignored can be your fate to be accepted even with highly important achievements e.g.: the transistor was not invented by Shockley and Brattain in 1945 but by Julius Edgar Lilienfeld and Oskar Ernst Heil in 1925.

Wishing all a healthy and successful new year and a merry xmas to whom it is relevant!

Ilija Barukčić

Horandstrasse

DE-26401 Jever

Germany

26.12.2020

Dear Claus Fütterer ,

i do agree with several of your points mentioned just before.

However, one aspect of the debate appears to be overlooked so far.

Several scientific publication idicate that todate

a lot of fundamental errors can be found published in science

which sheds very unfavorable light on the system of peer-review as such.

Peer review should gurantee some scientific quality but in fact it does not.

From my point of view, today's system of peer-review has not provided anything valueable to scientific progress and can and should be abondonned in toto and at once.

As humans and scientist who search the truth and who have own experience and some opinion about what is right and what is wrong

we don't need any ideologically misguided and almighty censorship renamed as (or under a flase flagg of) peer-review.

I do believe, that in the everday fight and competion of scientific concepts, those scientific concepts which are simpler and closer to objective reality will survive on the long run. However, we all and maybe the mankind itself could spare a lot of costs and uneccssary losses, if the scientific competition would work better than it does.

I feel privileged to be able to whish to all a healthy and successful new year 2021 and a merry xmas to whom it may be relevant!

Ilija Barukčić

Personally I think that the numbers of citations is fairly meaningless to determine if a research article is influential or of high quality. Just imagine that the article is cited only in predatory journals. What is that good for? Citations in renowned journals are certainly a good sign that an article is of interest to other researchers, but citations are not the measure of all things. You can consider yourself really influential when you are personally invited to give keynote or plenary lectures at international conferences or when you are awarded a scientific prize.

Dear Faiza Alliouche for more answers to your question please see this interesting discussion entitled

"Why is it bad to judge a paper by citation count?"

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37021/why-is-it-bad-to-judge-a-paper-by-citation-count

Well, Faiza Alliouche

I do agree that being cited repeatedly is " a clear indication that other researchers find your work interesting" Prof. Frank T. Edelmann. Regarding quality, I won't recommend generalization since other factors could contribute to increasing citations of a study (e.g., accessibility to & familiarity with the source study).

It's to be good paper because it's represent the current issues which is needed by public. And every one want get information about it. Like covid 19

"It's to be good paper"

Zaib Ullah

Not necessarily! Sometimes, a paper gets cited because it is a flawed one.

Dear Faiza Alliouche for more general information on citations, please see this instructive article entitled

Citations: Indicators of Quality? The Impact Fallacy

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frma.2016.00001/full

it is at least an indication that the paper data is worth to be shared...

Dear Faiza Alliouche you can get many more answers to this question when you read the following closely related RG threads:

1. How many citations does it take to indicate an academic article is influential?

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_many_citations_does_it_take_to_indicate_an_academic_article_is_influential (404 answers)

2. Does the number of citations reflect the quality or originality of the work?

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_the_number_of_citations_reflect_the_quality_or_originality_of_the_work (96 answers)

For people to cite your paper means the paper is relevant, and therefore can indicate that the paper is a good paper. There are a lot of published papers that have not been cited before, so if your paper is cited, then it means it is good.

Dear Faiza Alliouche, Zaib Ullah, Mohialdeen Alotumi and Humphrey Danso according to my knowledge and personal experience a citation of a research paper does not mean that it is either good or flawed. I think citation does not tell us much about the quality of the cited research. Instead, it just means that it is previous work which is relevant and closely related to my own study.

In this context, please also see this interesting discussion entitled

"What is the meaning of citation in research papers?"

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-meaning-of-citation-in-research-papers

Dear Prof. Frank T. Edelmann,

I beg to disagree with you and stick to my previous statement, "Not necessarily! Sometimes, a paper gets cited because it is a flawed one."

I repeat, a flawed study can be cited to reject its findings that were based on unsound methodology or misinterpretation of data. In fact, it could be condemned publicly if its findings lead to serious repercussions.

Here is a good article analyzing a flawed study.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong

Mohialdeen Alotumi you say that "Sometimes, a paper gets cited because it is a flawed one." but I think the key word here is "sometimes." I myself have never encountered a highly cited article that was getting that much attention because it was poorly done.

Indeed, David L Morgan! It is uncommon. It depends on one's cup of tea or interest direction in reading. I, personally, came across several ones. However, I accentuate that citing a flawed study is not frequent.

Probably, if you read my previous comment, you would be amused how a flawed study could be highly regarded at a point of time, and later totally disregarded.

Best,

I think so, generally it indicates better quality.

Depends on how many self and coerced citations are included. Generally speaking, higher citations denote good work done.