What do you think of the single author paper cited more than multi-authors paper? Do you think that correct? Please, I invite you to the discussion. Thanks.
The citation of an article depends on the quality of the paper and it's relevance (A paper with rich content, sound method, with conclusions having wide implications may be considered a good quality paper). However, when there are more than one author in a paper the paper reaches to a larger audience (including followers of the co-authors) and thus increasing the chances of citation.
Right, it depends on the quality of the paper. However, it also depend a type of the paper. Commonly, a review or meta analysis paper and method paper are more often cited in the science community, which are not quite related to the quality of the paper. That is the reason why scholarly journals prefer to those types of the papers to the original papers. Furthermore, multiple authors also influence how many the paper can be cited because each author can promote the paper in multiple ways, widening the possibility of the paper's being exposed to the media and potential readers. Multidisciplinary research is also in the same line with the ripple effect brought by the multiple authors. For example, my paper (Article Optimizing Staffing, Quality, and Cost in Home Healthcare Nu...
) has been continuously introduced to the industrial engineering since 2017, in addition to the nursing science, which is expected to increase the citations (and collaborations) in both disciplines soon, probably 2019-2020.
One hypothesis in favor of citation markups for single author papers may be that these could be the result of several years of hard work during the author's PhD thesis (assuming a non-cumulative thesis without many publications along the way), which could suggest a more thorough analysis and background research.
There will generally be a higher number of citations for multi-authored papers than for single-authored papers simply because more co-authors can cite their own joint paper.