• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

被期刊声誉和引用次数迷住了?根据出版物参考文献中的线索,探讨学生的偏见和对可信度的认知。

Starstruck by journal prestige and citation counts? On students' bias and perceptions of trustworthiness according to clues in publication references.

作者信息

Eika Evelyn, Sandnes Frode Eika

机构信息

Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Technology, Art and Design, Oslo Metropolitan University, St OlavsPlass, P.O. Box 4, 0130 Oslo, Oslo Norway.

出版信息

Scientometrics. 2022;127(11):6363-6390. doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04521-4. Epub 2022 Oct 10.

DOI:10.1007/s11192-022-04521-4
PMID:36246786
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9548432/
Abstract

Research is becoming increasingly accessible to the public via open access publications, researchers' social media postings, outreach activities, and popular disseminations. A healthy research discourse is typified by debates, disagreements, and diverging views. Consequently, readers may rely on the information available, such as publication reference attributes and bibliometric markers, to resolve conflicts. Yet, critical voices have warned about the uncritical and one-sided use of such information to assess research. In this study we wanted to get insight into how individuals without research training place trust in research based on clues present in publication references. A questionnaire was designed to probe respondents' perceptions of six publication attributes. A total of 148 students responded to the questionnaire of which 118 were undergraduate students (with limited experience and knowledge of research) and 27 were graduate students (with some knowledge and experience of research). The results showed that the respondents were mostly influenced by the number of citations and the recency of publication, while author names, publication type, and publication origin were less influential. There were few differences between undergraduate and graduate students, with the exception that undergraduate students more strongly favoured publications with multiple authors over publications with single authors. We discuss possible implications for teachers that incorporate research articles in their curriculum.

摘要

通过开放获取出版物、研究人员的社交媒体帖子、推广活动和大众传播,研究成果正越来越容易被公众获取。健康的研究讨论以辩论、分歧和不同观点为特征。因此,读者可能会依靠可用信息,如出版物参考属性和文献计量指标,来解决冲突。然而,批评的声音警告说,不加批判和片面地使用此类信息来评估研究是不可取的。在本研究中,我们想深入了解没有研究培训背景的个人如何基于出版物参考文献中的线索来信任研究。设计了一份问卷来探究受访者对六种出版物属性的看法。共有148名学生回复了问卷,其中118名是本科生(研究经验和知识有限),27名是研究生(有一些研究知识和经验)。结果表明,受访者大多受引用次数和出版时效性的影响,而作者姓名、出版物类型和出版来源的影响较小。本科生和研究生之间差异不大,唯一的例外是本科生比单作者出版物更喜欢多作者出版物。我们讨论了将研究文章纳入课程的教师可能面临的潜在影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/059fd6273c77/11192_2022_4521_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/c5b7d11b7f02/11192_2022_4521_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/14c7a9e519c7/11192_2022_4521_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/059fd6273c77/11192_2022_4521_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/c5b7d11b7f02/11192_2022_4521_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/14c7a9e519c7/11192_2022_4521_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c517/9548432/059fd6273c77/11192_2022_4521_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Starstruck by journal prestige and citation counts? On students' bias and perceptions of trustworthiness according to clues in publication references.被期刊声誉和引用次数迷住了?根据出版物参考文献中的线索,探讨学生的偏见和对可信度的认知。
Scientometrics. 2022;127(11):6363-6390. doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04521-4. Epub 2022 Oct 10.
2
The publication impact of the first 100 THOR Network publications by bibliometric and social network analyses.通过文献计量学和社会网络分析,评估前 100 篇 THOR 网络出版物的发表影响力。
Transfusion. 2022 Aug;62 Suppl 1:S1-S11. doi: 10.1111/trf.16956. Epub 2022 Jun 29.
3
Historical bibliometric analysis of the top cited articles on vesicoureteral reflux 1950-2016, and incorporation of a novel impact index.1950-2016 年关于膀胱输尿管反流的高被引文章的历史文献计量学分析,以及一个新的影响指数的纳入。
J Pediatr Urol. 2018 Oct;14(5):446.e1-446.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.04.004. Epub 2018 Apr 24.
4
Engaging undergraduate medical students in health research: students' perceptions and attitudes, and evaluation of a training workshop on research methodology.让本科医学生参与健康研究:学生的认知与态度,以及对研究方法培训工作坊的评估
J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2006;81(1-2):99-118.
5
Impact Factors and Prediction of Popular Topics in a Journal.期刊中热门话题的影响因素及预测
Ultraschall Med. 2016 Aug;37(4):343-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-111209. Epub 2016 Aug 4.
6
The 100 Most-Cited and Influential Articles in Collegiate Athletics.大学体育领域被引用最多且最具影响力的100篇文章。
Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 Jul 8;10(7):23259671221108401. doi: 10.1177/23259671221108401. eCollection 2022 Jul.
7
Where is students' research in evidence-informed decision-making in health? Assessing productivity and use of postgraduate students' research in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.学生在卫生领域循证决策方面的研究情况如何?评估低收入和中等收入国家研究生研究的产出及应用:一项系统综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Mar 9;15(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0169-9.
8
A systematic review on academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries.对中低收入国家研究生学术研究成果的系统评价。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Aug 28;16(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0360-7.
9
Mentor-mentee interaction and laboratory social environment: Do they matter in doctoral students' publication productivity?导师-学生互动与实验室社交环境:它们对博士生的论文发表产出有影响吗?
Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2017 Mar 4;45(2):130-144. doi: 10.1002/bmb.21001. Epub 2016 Sep 26.
10
Researcher perspectives on publication and peer review of data.研究人员对数据发表和同行评审的看法。
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 23;10(2):e0117619. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117619. eCollection 2015.

引用本文的文献

1
From Data to Decisions: Leveraging Retrieval-Augmented Generation to Balance Citation Bias in Burn Management Literature.从数据到决策:利用检索增强生成技术平衡烧伤管理文献中的引用偏差
Eur Burn J. 2025 Jun 2;6(2):28. doi: 10.3390/ebj6020028.

本文引用的文献

1
Untangling Trustworthiness and Uncertainty in Science: Implications for Science Education.理清科学中的可信度与不确定性:对科学教育的启示
Sci Educ (Dordr). 2022;31(5):1155-1180. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00322-6. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
2
How to fight an infodemic.如何应对信息疫情。
Lancet. 2020 Feb 29;395(10225):676. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30461-X.
3
cOAlition S: Response to PNAS.科研促进气候行动联合组织(Coalition S):对《美国国家科学院院刊》的回应。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Mar 26;116(13):5859-5860. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1902136116. Epub 2019 Mar 4.
4
Tracking the follow-up of work in progress papers.追踪正在撰写的论文的后续进展。
Scientometrics. 2018;114(3):1159-1174. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2631-4. Epub 2017 Dec 23.
5
Public perception and communication of scientific uncertainty.公众对科学不确定性的认知和交流。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2017 Feb;146(2):286-304. doi: 10.1037/xge0000260.
6
Author Credit for Transdisciplinary Collaboration.跨学科合作的作者署名
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 16;10(9):e0137968. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137968. eCollection 2015.
7
Outside the pipeline: reimagining science education for nonscientists.管道之外:为非科学家重新构想科学教育。
Science. 2013 Apr 19;340(6130):314-7. doi: 10.1126/science.1230855.
8
Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews.谷歌学术的涵盖范围是否足以单独用于系统评价。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 Jan 9;13:7. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7.
9
Ending honorary authorship.终结荣誉作者身份。
Science. 2012 Aug 31;337(6098):1019. doi: 10.1126/science.1224988.
10
Repetition, not number of sources, increases both susceptibility to misinformation and confidence in the accuracy of eyewitnesses.重复,而非信息源数量,会增加对错误信息的易感性以及目击者对自身准确性的信心。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2012 Feb;139(2):320-6. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.12.004. Epub 2012 Jan 16.