In some papers writers cite 300/400 in the reference list and publish four figure number of papers, I wondered, they are reading all of them.
Dear Gupta,
From my experience most of the people only read partly the refences used in their works. Few of the references are read entirely. The majority of the people read the abstracts or parts that are interesting for their work if the abstracts give a clue about that.
Best of luck!
Teodora
Dear Gupta,
From my experience most of the people only read partly the refences used in their works. Few of the references are read entirely. The majority of the people read the abstracts or parts that are interesting for their work if the abstracts give a clue about that.
Best of luck!
Teodora
Dear Gupta,
I think some authors are using references without understanding their details. However, Good papers can be cited regularly just because it's used always as a reference.
Good luck
Mustafa
Yes, some people definitely do not read the papers they are "citing" - or at least not completely. Often only the abstract/summary is read.
I think the problem could partly be solved by re-introducing precise page citations and not just citing the overall work (especially annoying and unhelpful when entire books are cited, without page or even chapter indication!). At least wrongly copied citations could be identified in that way!
The quality control of scientific papers is really difficult and not very well solved at the moment.
Yes, you are right. Most of the researchers do not read full-length papers even sometime a few papers are not found within the text but listed in the reference list.
I think many people cite papers whre they only read the title or the abstract. But I think it is better to cite the pepers that really influenced their work and not every paper that deals with this topic. I hate sentences that you can not read fluently because after every second work they quote another paper.
Maybe the bibliography shpuld have two parts: one in whicht the most influencial papers for the publication are cited and another part which introduces further readings.
Besides: Reviewers that insist on having their papers cited are another problem which causes a far too long list (and is embarassing for them in my view cause sometimes it is not even the same topic) ;-)
I think the investigators should cite only those papers which are really relevant to the work conducted and provide thought process for arriving at meaningful comprehensive DISCUSSION section of the manuscript being written for publication.
If somebody agrees with what another person has been trying to say, or the author says what his reader does not know just as much, why not reading the rest of the paper? One can cite without reading, of course, but whoever does not go through the text is the one who loses more in situations like those ones.
My answer is yes, people do it. Personally, I have never done it, because it would be against the very definition of citation. I think that it can be considered as illegal. However, I know cases, even of highly ranked professors, who have done it.
Dear Gupta P D,
"I do not read, but condemn!" - According to various sources, part of the sentence.
The exact quote, "Do not read, but condemn" is nowhere recorded.
Regard, Shafagat
Probably yes, especially in the case in which the cited article/s do not support accurately the respective text/s. An arising problem is, that sometimes, the fact of incorrect citations, is perpetuated to the next publications of the same or different author/s.
Regards
yes, most of the authors do not read the full text and this is a wrong practice.In a recent publication: Highly sensitive and selective method for detecting ultra-trace levels of aqueous uranyl ions by strongly photoluminescent responsive amine modified cadmium sulphide quantum dots’ by Raj Kumar Dutta and Ambika Kumar, Anal. Chem., 2016, 88 (18), pp 9071–9078..
The authors have cited reference no 2 in the manuscript titled ‘Review-Advances in technologies for the measurement of uranium in diverse matrices’ Talanta 77 (2008) 9–20’ but not at appropriate place. The statement quote ‘These techniques involve expensive instruments and moreover the sample preparation is tedious and time consuming’ unquote, is incorrect and highly misleading.
In addition to, there are basic/fundamental mistakes.
Working Paper: Comments on: Highly sensitive and selective method for detecting ultra-trace levels of aqueous uranyl ions by strongly photoluminescent responsive amine modified cadmium sulphide quantum dots’ by Raj Kumar Dutta and Ambika Kumar, Anal. Chem., 2016, 88 (18), pp 9071–9078.
D.P.S. RATHORE
Regarding the last question of Dr. Gupta, an inaccurate citation in a publication can easily be distinguished by the reviewer/s with the prerequisite to fulfill correctly their task. A citation in a non appropriate place, as pointed out by Dr. Rathore is a little subjective and more difficult to be handled. But, even in this case, a good reviewer can arrange this issue successfully.
Another point is the number of reviewers. In my opinion there must be at least two reviewers for each submitted manuscript (if it is passed the initial screening by the editors).
And a third point is, editors take into account the job of the reviewers. Unfortunately, from my experience, there are cases, in which, the job of the reviewers is not evaluated. This has a negative impact on the quality of the publication.
Regards
Dear Gupta,
Back to this issue. As I said before if the work is worth, why not reading it all? But there are many good researches, worth reading and yet the author says something wrong but this mistake does not interfere with his research. Say, an author has an excelent study about statins and yet he calls LDL bad cholesterol I have no interest to read more of that book. I came in contact with your work, I looked for your other researches and your contributions at RG.
Sure, it is much safer reading it all before citing. And most.of the times I read not only that work I am citing, but history of the time, biography, etc. Usually I.cite people's full name, their bithdates and if applicable the.date of their dearh. I once was writing about how artificial sweetners were discovered, and I took a look at when gloves and masks started being used in laboratories. Then in such a situation I cite that, but I do not read the whole work about masks and gloves. Other cases I will read all the person has written in life. Even though I May.be interested in one of his books.
There is another publication in which the authors have simply copy and pasted -all 8 references from his previous publication but without citing it.
In addition to it:
Why some journal Editors/Journals are encouraging scientific misconduct?
There are some interesting observations in this question in my profile on RG.
In the present publication, authors have cited the references just by copy and paste, without even going in to the detailed procedures for uranium determination.
What is the purpose of citing references in research publications? - ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_purpose_of_citing_references_in_research_publications/1 [accessed Feb 12, 2017].
In my opinion, in depth literature survey is essential for any research project. But, only relevant and up-to-date citation of references /support to the stated statements to the published literature should be included in research publications.
What is the purpose of citing references in research publications? - ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_purpose_of_citing_references_in_research_publications/1 [accessed Feb 12, 2017].
Article Letter to the Editor: Comments related to the publication ti...
Article Separation and preconcentration of rare earth elements in ge...
In addition to there are some interesting observations related with citation of references in question on RG in my profile.
Can any Doctorate Degree be awarded on a Case-history publication ?
Working Paper Letter to the Editor: Query related to publication titled “T...
Incorrect/highly misleading author's response should be published or better retracted? this is a question on RG in my profile.
As per the prevalent practice of publishing author's response and comments on the author's publication is very common and is being adopted by international journals.In my opinion, in-correct or highly misleading author's response should not be published.It will be more advisable, if such publications are retracted.
Article Comments on Uranium Concentration in Groundwater in Hisar City, India
Research Comments on: Studies on effective decomposition of monazite ...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers