I am looking for a methodology that distinguishes the number of citations in scholarly work that are due to high quality, disruptive findings or edge content VERSUS
the number of citations that aggregate naturally over an extensive time period since the birth of a study.
Citation is an important issue for researchers which reflects the quality of the paper. Currently, googlescholar is a good reference for citation index.
The score depends mostly on the following:
- Which journal you are publishing in, the ISI, web of Science, Scopus databases are highly recommended.
- If you choose to publish in these journals as “open access” is will add up.
- If the topic is “hot issue” this will increase the citation
- Sometimes, luck is important
i would to ask how choose the journal s trustworthy and it's highly impact factor valued
How he chose the journal for publish ?
Muayyad, thank you.
A large number of citations can mean two things. Either like you said it's good research and the topic is hot issue OR,
it may indicate more years since the paper was authored, so naturally citations will add up.
I was wondering if there is a framework to help evaluate this other than the indirect indication of the publication year.
Maria
citation depend about work our topic some research high quality but not cite because the topic of research not work on it.
but citation is important and reflect reading our research
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications