Dear Raham Bacha

There is no exact number for references related to a particular scientific fact or evidence. You have to quote (references) all those relevant to the idea or argument you are handling in your text.

If, almost simultaneously, several authors investigated a scientific problem with a hypothesis formulated in an adequate way and taken to the field of verification through observations and experiments; These publications deserve to be mentioned and recognized in the scientific background with which he is founding his own work.

If several authors mention a fact, but only one of them truly investigated it and created new knowledge; This is the one who deserves the credit of the appointment. The others probably only mention it in their work as scientific background, but not as a product of their own research.

On the other hand, it is not ethical to read in a superficial way the research works that the authors made and published their results as original and relevant. It is convenient that you read in a critical and complete way all the sections of the publication, to make a correct evaluation of the results.

regards

Jose Luis

P.S. Until now, most of the researchers who publish and communicate in RG, know the rules of measurement and evaluation of the published works, assigning them a value, adding besides the number of citations, the quantity and quality of the comments issued in response to other works and the number of readers of their publications.

There is essentially no definite limit to the number of related papers to be cited. If you find a single representative paper or a few papers in which other related papers are well cited, however, you had better cite only such a paper or papers and omit other papers, mentioning that other related papers can be found in that paper or those papers.

superb Sir, Tatsuo Tabata, I am related to Ultrasound in Medical Sciences. I have almost 13 publications but my Impact Factor is hardly 1.7 because the Impact factor of Ultrasound Journals is toooooo low. If we increase the number citation in our papers, will it not ultimately improve the journal (IF)?

@ Dr Raham

I have also observed the same thing you mention above. But, I think its unethical, so better not to follow it. Also, hope everyone will understand it and it may have a bad impression.

Regards

Dear researchers,

Just Imagine I worked upon the Sonographic diagnostic criteria of Shoulder impingement syndrome in Pakistan, and the same topic is worked out in China, Australia, UK, US and some countries in middle east. Later on some one is working on shoulder impingement either in physiotherapy or any branch of medical sciences, but he cite only my article and ignore all the others. Is it not injustice with others?

How to justify?

Secondly Impact Factor (IF) of a journal could be calculated by dividing the number of citation in a year on the number of articles published by the journal in that year.

This way, the IF of the journal will be decreased.

That's why most popular ultrasound journal have IF not more than 1.

In my opinion it is rational to cite more and more articles for the same fact.

Please help improve this concept.

Generally up to three (3) references are found for a single comment in most of the good journals.

Thanks

In my opinion, citation should be done in relevence of work (very specific to results of both papers). Many similar topics is always possible but not always to same result everywhere. I have seen many similar reported topics but results is new, at least to some extent, also i think its necessary. So, i think if one goes in depth to the results (not introduction/literature survey part) something uniqueness will be found and this is the real thing really required for citation.

Thanks

Will said by Elangbam Chitra Devi but still I have the same opinion. To convene me with arguments or journal guidelines i.e ICMJE author guidelines. Honestly speaking no one has such a free time to read thoroughly someones paper. We often read abstract, Objective, Methodology to some extent (if needed for study design), Results at a glance, tables and graphs in detail and conclusion.

you are very right Nada A Rasheed. I am asking for the number of references on a single fact as shown in the figure

It is dependent on the level at which the fact is needed or being used. If it is a PhD work, at least, three references for a fact is recommended. If it is MPhil, at least, 2 references to support a fact is appropriate.

Good Harry Barton Essel,

Is there any reference for this numbering, I mean guidelines from journals or any international protocol

Dear Raham Bacha

There is no exact number for references related to a particular scientific fact or evidence. You have to quote (references) all those relevant to the idea or argument you are handling in your text.

If, almost simultaneously, several authors investigated a scientific problem with a hypothesis formulated in an adequate way and taken to the field of verification through observations and experiments; These publications deserve to be mentioned and recognized in the scientific background with which he is founding his own work.

If several authors mention a fact, but only one of them truly investigated it and created new knowledge; This is the one who deserves the credit of the appointment. The others probably only mention it in their work as scientific background, but not as a product of their own research.

On the other hand, it is not ethical to read in a superficial way the research works that the authors made and published their results as original and relevant. It is convenient that you read in a critical and complete way all the sections of the publication, to make a correct evaluation of the results.

regards

Jose Luis

P.S. Until now, most of the researchers who publish and communicate in RG, know the rules of measurement and evaluation of the published works, assigning them a value, adding besides the number of citations, the quantity and quality of the comments issued in response to other works and the number of readers of their publications.

Very well explained, José Luis García Vigil!

Now a question arises which deal with the citation of latest article. Almost majority of our researchers and reviewers want to add latest citations. I faced a lot of peoples who don't know the ABC of my field but they look for the year of publication which is cited. If it is older that 10 years, "rubbish remove it, useless, add latest". Almost majority of the diseases are originally named and described in 18th and 19th century. But now we consume our energy to establish some more beneficial diagnosis or cure for them. If I want to introduce the disease and give the original citation then it will be a century old.

How to overcome this problem.

i don't think there is restriction to the number of reference so far you cite and reference them

How many references could be given for a particular fact? I think that the maximum of three references is sufficient, regarding papers, as pointed out by dear @Shibabrata Pattanayak. In addition, dear @Harry Barton Essel made a good point, concerning PhD and MPhil.

Is there any restriction on the number of references for a single fact? As far as I know, no.

Regards

Very good and Thanks Oluwafemi Samson Balogun, Aparna Sathya Murthy, and Aristidis Matsoukis.

Any one other research want to contribute in this context.

To the best of my knowledge, NO hard or fast rule as regards number of references.

All you need is to ensure that you have good number in order to substantiate your findings.

I am agree with Adeleke Ibrahim Taiwo. There are no heard and fast rule for the citation in any journal guidelines even the guidelines of ICMJE. Its mean multiple references related to the same work should be given for a particular fact.

It depends on how important the issue is? How much you want to stress the issue.

Very True Subhash C. Kundu. But the same fact is described by multiple Authors but some of them have been praised for citing them while the others left. Secondly journals give preference to latest citations, this way the original author of the fact is missed.

The fair is to cite the first one who said the fact then mention that has literatured, you may also mention to the most recent one.

Good luck

Aly R Abdel-Moemin

this another example

It is dependent on the level at which the fact is needed or being used. If it is a PhD work, at least, three references for a fact is recommended. If it is MPhil, at least, 2 references to support a fact is appropriate.

I think as many references you chance on during your literature survey must be weighed carefully and the best, classic and most current ones be discussed to firmly ground the fact. Of course, the scope of readership audience and qualifications matters.

Agree with Tatsuo

Another example

Good question. I agree with you Dr José Luis García Vigil.

Regards!

Absolutely, there is no specific number of references to be given to a particular fact. However, in as much as the available references are supportive of the fact in question, authors can use to substantiate the authenticity of the fact. Besides, it is also a good writing practice to ensure that the references used are current and characteristically genuine and apt.

Good luck

I agree with Dr.Nyakno

Nyakno jimmy George,

thank you very much for yours valuable information

Dear Dr. Raham Bacha

If the original quote is old and there are other more recent ones that take it as background for their own work but do not add more knowledge; The first appointment deserves to be recognized, even if it is old.

If the original quote is old and there are more recent ones, but only some add information, validate the previous knowledge and update it in an original way; Both the old appointment or reference and the recent ones that discovered new knowledge deserve mention.

regards

Jose Luis

Dear José Luis García Vigil,

I feel that your answer is an elegant way out so that all relevant work is recognised. Thank you!

Warm regards Tina

Thank you Tina Lindhard. And Thank you I am really favor your opinion José Luis García Vigil

Interesting question

I agree with Dr. José Luis García Vigil

Regards

I think as much as relevant work should be cited without any discrimination. Anyone who disagree please argue.

Agree with Elangbam Chitra Devi

I think the most relevant citation will be the paper from which that idea/fact generated. However for showing the relevance of your work few more references could also be cited.

Hello Dr. R. Bacha,

Thanks a lot for your good question.

Regarding the number of the citations (references) for the particular fact, I think, there is no specific rules. It may depends on how much the important of that fact and well known or not.

Also, it depends on the author's desire.

Some authors would like to mention how much the capacity of their literature review.

Some authors may want to build the strong fact.

Anyway, in my opinion, most of the authors cite three to five references for the particular fact.

Best ragards

Certainly, 7 can be cited and perhaps should be, but where does discovery end and common knowledge begin? In my work, while a discovery is cited appropriately that is the end of the matter. An opinion on a discovery is also cited.

Good question and informative answers. Thank you all.