Citation pattern and lifespan: a comparison of discipline, institution, and individual

• Published in: Scientometrics Vol. 89; no. 3; pp. 955 - 966
• Main Authors: Slyder, Jacob B., Stein, Beth R., Sams, Brent S., Walker, David M., Jacob Beale, B., Feldhaus, Jeffrey J., Copenheaver, Carolyn A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.12.2011; Springer
• Subjects: Bias; Bibliometrics. Scientometrics; Bibliometrics. Scientometrics. Evaluation; Citation analysis; Co authorship; Computer Science; Exact sciences and technology; Information and communication sciences; Information science. Documentation; Information Storage and Retrieval; Library and information science. General aspects; Library Science; Scholarly publishing; Sciences and techniques of general use; Subject fields; Citation biases; Citation rates; Author seniority; Co-authorship; Article length; Self citation; Filing; Impact factor; Periodical; Frequency; Citation; Comparative study; Indicator
• ISSN: 0138-9130; 1588-2861
• DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0467-x

Citation frequency is often used in hiring and tenure decisions as an indicator of the quality of a researcher’s publications. In this paper, we examine the influence of discipline, institution, journal impact factor, length of article, number of authors, seniority of author, and gender on citation rate of top-cited papers for academic faculty in geography and forestry departments. Self-citation practices and patterns of citation frequency across post-publication lifespan were also examined. Citation rates of the most-highly cited paper for all tenured forestry ( N  = 122) and geography ( N  = 91) faculty at Auburn University, Michigan State University, Northern Arizona University, Oklahoma State University, Pennsylvania State University, Texas A&M University, University of Florida, University of Massachusetts, University of Washington, and Virginia Tech were compared. Foresters received significantly more citations than geographers ( t  = 2.46, P  = 0.02) and more senior authors received more citations than junior researchers ( r 2  = 0.14, P  = 0.03). Articles published in journals with higher impact factors also received more citations ( r 2  = 0.28, P  = 0.00). The median self-citation rate was 10% and there was no temporal pattern to the frequency of citations received by an individual article ( x 2  = 176). Our results stress the importance of only comparing citation rates within a given discipline and confirm the importance of author-seniority and journal rankings as factors that influence citation rate of a given article.