I think that there are certain instances when we want to make a contrast between a popular opinion and a learned opinion on the same issue. In that case, it Is certainly permissible to cite "popular" publications, and I have done so in learned journals.

Are books that are cited always reliable?

We are facing a dilemma. On the one hand, a scholarly publication is one in which the content is written by experts in a particular field of study Accordingly a scholarly work should thoroughly cite all source materials used and is usually subject to "peer review" prior to publication. This means that independent experts in the field review, or "referee" the publication to check the accuracy and validity of its claims. On the other hand, we often use popular publications (Textbooks, Wikipedia, Zines, Newspapers and drafts on Internet) for writing our papers. These are not  "peer review"  resources so they should not be included in a paper in the first place! So how to resolve this puzzle?

Dear Marcel, Thank you for asking. Actually, I did not say 'books". I said  textbooks used in classroom which are intended as a teaching tool.

I think that there are certain instances when we want to make a contrast between a popular opinion and a learned opinion on the same issue. In that case, it Is certainly permissible to cite "popular" publications, and I have done so in learned journals.

Dear Dr. Mahmoud,

There is no rule. Generally, here in Brazil, textbooks used in classroom are considered how official material.

With reference to the internet, only official websites are considered.

Blogs of the Internet, materials of newspapers of daily life, journal not scientific are not considered.

Thank You very much  for share this question.

Best Regards,

Vanessa

If you see all the formats of citations (APA, Chicago, etc), all of them includes how to cite any form of document (videos on internet, films, CDs, webpages, newspaper articles, oral communications, audiotapes, broadcasts, ...etc).  But you need to use them carefully, in order to prevent the lose of credibility of your work. You need to consider some aspects.

1. Never cite wikipedia (it´s a wiki, it mens that people can edit in any moment the information there, then you cannot trust on its information).  Obiously, you can use it to take citations, or preliminary information. 

2. You can use newspapers,  if you are citing facts or news that matter for  your text.  I mean, if you are talking about some problem in agribussiness, you can cite an article of a newspaper that analyzes that situation.

3. You can use internet, but with some care. It is preferable to cite pages of recognized institutions in your knowledge area (like universities, ministeries, etc)

4. You can use any publication if you are talking about opinions or beliefs. For example, I cited in an article some opinions collected in blogs about emo subculture in costa rica, as a form to complement the argumentation.

5. In my opinion, you can use textbooks as a valid reference, beacause they are submited to an editorial process, like the peer review papers. Obiously you need to consider the level of your book. A book called "physics for dummys", or a primary texbook are not good citations.

6. Use your criteria. If you are citing for document theory, it is preferable to use the better and more actualized papers or books. But if you are justifying your research or taking into account opinions, you can use more lax criteria.  You, as a profesional in your area, need to have a criteria of when use some citations.

7. Finally, some journals use more rigid arguments than those I are recommending to you.  You need to take in account the criteria of your target journal.

I hope that answer can help you

Dear  Luis,

Thank you for participation in this question. Certainly your response opens further discussions. Personally, I  read your answer and found your recommendation as a very good starter. 

With regards,

Mahmoud

I believe we can refer to these kind publications (Textbooks, Wikipedia, Zines, and Newspapers) in the Reference Section of a peer-reviewed journal. Why not use these common publications if they are reliable. 

At the same time, I believe we can not depend on Internet drafts on Internet, because they are not finalized yet, and so they are not reliable.

No one needs to trust or do not trust in a reference just because it is popular. Wikipedia looks generally trustable (since, as a dictionary, for example, it makes generally sense), but it does not intend to reach the same deep level of a fundamental research, I suppose.

In scientific publishing we should avoid "popular publications" according to your definition. As Editor of scholarly journals, I must said we usually not accept those citations from those sources. We recommend authors to cite proper scholarly, peer-reviewed works.

Standing on reliable sources leads to reliable results.

A paper in a  scholarly journal may have tow parts: A technical one and a conceptual understanding of the notions involved. Some prefer to stay only on the first option. Others that the want to be understood by a wide readers, they prefer the second option where of course you can cite popular sources.   

Textbooks, generally are "peer reviewed". Before they are published, there are textbooks that undergo a series of stringent review and evaluation, sometimes so much more strict than articles in refereed research journals.

Scholarly and Popular Materials

When conducting research it is important to distinguish between journal articles and magazine articles. Journal articles are typically referred to as "scholarly," while magazine articles are usually considered "popular". A third category, "trade" magazines or journals, are written for professionals in a particular field but are not strictly research related. Below are additional criteria to consider when differentiating between journals and magazines.

Example Journal & Stated Purpose

• Scholarly Journal ---------- Journal of Food Science and Technology

"Publishes peer reviewed research papers in... science, technology, packaging, and engineering of foods.... Special emphasis is given to fundamental and applied research...."

• Popular Magazine -------- Bon Appétit

"Offers 'life through the lens of food' — cooking in, dining out, culture, travel, entertainment, shopping and design."

• Trade Magazine/Journal----Food Management

"Provides ideas for food service directors, managers and chefs through coverage of industry issues and events, operational topics and food trends that affect the noncommercial food service industry."

http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/tutorials/scholarly-popular/

A scholarly publication is one in which the content is written by experts in a particular field of study - generally for the purpose of sharing original research or analyzing others' findings. Scholarly work will thoroughly cite all source materials used and is usually subject to "peer review" prior to publication. This means that independent experts in the field review, or "referee" the publication to check the accuracy and validity of its claims. The primary audience for this sort of work is fellow experts and students studying the field. As a result the content is typically much more sophisticated and advanced than articles found in general magazines, or professional/trade journals.

In brief, scholarly work is:

written by experts for experts

based on original research or intellectual inquiry

provides citations for all sources used

is usually peer reviewed prior to publication

To see the typical components of a scholarly journal article check out the Anatomy of a Scholarly Article from North Carolina State University Libraries.

Popular sources

While many of your research projects will require you to read articles published in scholarly journals, books or other peer reviewed source of information, there is also a wealth of information to be found in more popular publications. These aim to inform a wide array of readers about issues of interest and are much more informal in tone and scope. Examples include general news, business and entertainment publications such as Time Magazine, Business Weekly, Vanity Fair.

Note, special interest publications which are not specifically written for an academic audience are also considered "popular" i.e., National Geographic, Scientific American, Psychology Today.  See http://help.library.ubc.ca/evaluating-and-citing-sources/scholarly-versus-popular-sources/

Near the end of his book The Future of the Mind. The Scientific Quest to Understand, Enhance, and Empower the Mind, 2014, Doubleday New York, Michio Kaku writes that the human footprints on the moon will probably still be there in billions of years from now. Why making such claims in books that are aimed to make scientific approaches popular to the general public? Should such a book be cited in a scholarly journal?

Thank you for your participation and  good discussions so far.  Yet for an effective scholarly research, I  think we must be able to discern between scholarly and non-scholarly publications, as well as what a „Peer-Reviewed‟ publication means.   To find out the nature of the publication we are going to use these terms need more definitions. 

Scholarly, peer-reviewed/refereed publications : This refers to the process an article goes through before being published. It is reviewed and evaluated by other scholars in the field (peers) for accuracy and to ensure it contributes to the field. Some peer-reviewed journals reject more articles than they accept. Yet, many peer-reviewed publications include book reviews which are not peer-reviewed.

Non-scholarly peer-reviewed publications: Some non-scholarly sources include a peer-review process which is not necessarily carried out by scholars. For example, Wikipedia is peer-reviewed by other Wikipedians and is not scholarly. They should not be cited since their contents are dynamic! (may change by others)

But scholarly, peer-reviewed/referees publications will also become dynamic in meaning/interpretation when they are judged and discussed after they have been published, or not? What to do with so-called outdated scholarly, peer-reviewed/referees publications? Are the perceived truths of yesterday the perceived truths of today or tomorrow?

Perhaps scientifically unaccepted ideas presented in Wikipedia might become scientifically important ideas in future research?

Dear  Marcel ,

Thank you for heating up the discussion. Honestly, your questions above sounds philosophical and I am frighten to answer them :-)

All I can say If  the materials can be changed at any time, by anyone, in any place, ...  by Wikipedians without proper standard and control, we soon would see GIGO everywhere..

N.B.: GIGO means Garbage In, Garbage Out

Dear Mahmoud,

So it is the speed/rate of change in content and perceived content that is a key factor? All knowledge evolves, but some might change more rapidly than others, and the direction of change is also important... 

Dear Marcel. Does “change” make things better? Maybe sometimes it does, but not always. 

A quot from Irene Peter "Just because everything is different doesn't mean anything has changed"

Dear Mahmoud,

Indeed, in hasty science practice change might be too rapid. Old publications that have severaly criticized may become popular again during a later stage of the science process.   

Any simple encyclopaedia is dynamic. Where is the absolute true? We just have to use our own head. Where is the role of the scientific capacity? Even the language is dynamic.

Dear Antonio, Maybe I used the word "dynamic" wrongly in the first place. I meant being regularly changed per wish or changed per opinion and not the fact or truth. I meant "dynamically" in a negative way and not positive as you or dear Marcel may think. For instance, suppose you cited some wikis in your paper and those reading your paper after it is published. If the reader want to track your references he/she can not find the original text you cited. So this kind of dynamism is  not good, or is it? Citation must be valid and remain intact, in my opinion.

Dear Mahmoud,

Now I understand what you mean. What to do with a text you cite and then disappeared? How can the cited text be checked/verified?

Cheers

Yes dear Marcel this was in my mind.

In addition to Wikipedia, other types of Internet-based information are dynamic too! (more likely to change, move, or be removed). We must find a way to preserve the relevant information from the sources cited in our papers.. But how? Simply we should avoid citing such links or URLs in all peer-reviewed papers.

Probably you are right, dear Mahmood. In your example it looks that someone (or you?) did trust in the wrong (popular) references (fail in the scientific capacity). Perhaps you should read my previous answers again. As far as I remember, I never cited generalist encyclopedias in my scientific works.

Another point about good practices among scholars would be a firm stance against predatory publishers appearing everywhere, just like mushrooms after the rain! What is you stand on  predatory publishers? Should scholars avoid submitting papers to them, serving on their editorial boards, reviewing papers for them, or advertising in them.

Dear Prof. Mahmoud Omid; In my opinion any reference cited in scholarly journal must be available on back tracking or cross checking to the researchers/readers. it hardly matters that it is from popular or scholarly journal. Thanks

The greatest personalities can publish their ideas, facts, experience in newspapers or popular journals. For instance, if we deeply respect academician Kapitsa, we will cite his thoughts everywhere. My friend (PhD in Biology, famous personality in our region) likes to publish his scientific articles in popular journals. His ideas can't loose their value,Not only greatest scientists, but also ordinary researchers and professionals can read his highly interesting publications and cite them everywhere. A lot of scientists use fresh citations from popular journals for emotional color in their reports, presentations or lectures. 

Dear Pechonkina. Based on your comment you are in favor of content, i.e., content is more important than its container. But do you really think highly professional technical articles are welcomed by readers of newspapers. So we better publish our works in a proper place, Finding the right containers for our products can be justified and what we put inside the container is also become important.

In my field the main source of citations is Pub Med. Of course, the best article to be cited is, on my opinion, the one which better reflects the concept I want to explain. Nothing else is considered by me.  

I think we are looking at the content. If its not there then the journal cant be popular.

Yes, popular publications can also be cited in scholarly journal if such publications contain certain novel/fundamental ideas, facts, experience and thoughts.

I agree that popular publications may be cited, but one has to be extremely cautious about them. It is also true that there are many scholarly publications that are not trustworthy either. There are articles from good sources or not that I will never start reading. There are some that I know from the start that they are worthy checking. If the idea is acceptable, if it is dealt by other researchers or can be supported by other researches, I do use those sources. such a text may deserve the merit.

 I know that citation does not directly translate into quality, but the scientific contribution of rarely cited papers, unread journals and from a non scholarly source should be limited or avoided.

I personally avoid citing "popular" publications in a scholarly journal. I think that this can be done only in very exceptional cases. Many of scientific journals of my country ignore the acceptance of manuscripts for publication if non- scientific sources are cited.

Scientific research must be based on proven facts. Democracy may often be biased. While it is the responsibility of the Journals to ascertain the validity of an article before accepting for publication, it is equally well the responsibility of the researchers to verify the correctness of the excerpt being drawn from an article for citation. A researcher must  not blindly cite the published findings, even the most popular/cited ones.

Dear @Jolita and @Shanker. Thank you for your answers. Indeed, as you said "Scientific research must be based on proven facts." These days, science is becoming more competitive and accordingly researchers are pressured to publish more frequently and in highly ranked journals, a phenomenon which has been associated with a rising prevalence of statistically significant effects in research journals.

Dear Mahmoud,

The ranking algorithm itself, whatever, is not flawless. Hence the quality of any article can be judged only on its own merit and not on the basis of  the Journal where it is published.

Dear Shanker Thank you for your comments. You are right in saying all algorithms  has flaws (even RG scoring algorithms), yet contrary to what is said i (we) presume that journal ranking reflects many aspects about the publications including higher quality plus visibility (having unique DOI), correctness, promptness, citation to the paper, ... So even though "Content will be more Important than its Container" choosing the best container is preferable. 

If, instead of experimental results or established facts, one is interested in conceptions people have, distinctions they make in speech, idioms people use, opinions held in some quarters, and the like, then the source shouldn't matter. Indeed, if one is studying aspects of popular culture, newspapers and magazines should be one of the places to look. After all, the subject of a scholarly study may be non-scholarly material.