Abstract

Citation sentiment plays an important role in citation analysis and scholarly communication research, but prior citation sentiment studies have used small data sets and relied largely on manual annotation. This paper uses a large data set of PubMed Central (PMC) full-text publications and analyzes citation sentiment in more than 32 million citances within PMC, revealing citation sentiment patterns at the journal and discipline levels. This paper finds a weak relationship between a journal’s citation impact (as measured by CiteScore) and the average sentiment score of citances to its publications. When journals are aggregated into quartiles based on citation impact, we find that journals in higher quartiles are cited more favorably than those in the lower quartiles. Further, social science journals are found to be cited with higher sentiment, followed by engineering and natural science and biomedical journals, respectively. This result may be attributed to disciplinary discourse patterns in which social science researchers tend to use more subjective terms to describe others’ work than do natural science or biomedical researchers.

Highlights

  • Journal citation impact is no stranger to bibliometrics and science of science research

  • Journal citation impact is represented by two indicators, CiteScore and percentage of documents cited, both of which are taken from the 2018 journal metrics report

  • The results show that individual journals’ CiteScore and citation sentiment score may not follow a strong linear pattern; when journals are grouped into broad categories based on their citation impact, the relationship between citation impact and citation sentiment is evident, with a journal from upper citation quartile groups more likely to have a higher citation sentiment score

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Journal citation impact is no stranger to bibliometrics and science of science research. The goal of this paper is not to delve into the heated discussion of the strengths and weakness of journal impact factor and related indicators, but rather to compare journal citation impact with citation sentiment. The motivation behind this goal can be traced back to the early studies of citation functions by Garfield (Garfield, 1965; Garfield & Merton, 1979), in which the authors argued that citations serve difference functions in scholarly communication and proposed several citation functions for theoretical study. To understand the functions of citations, we must go beyond

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call