An analysis of academic citations and references generated by the ChatGPT artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot reveals the citations and references are in fact, fake. They are clearly generated by a predictive process rather than known facts. This suggests that early optimism regarding this technology for assisting in research could be misplaced, and that student misuse of the chatbot can be detected by the identification of fake citations and references. Despite these problems, the technology could have application in the writing of course materials for lower level undergraduate courses that do not necessarily require references. Subject matter expertise is required, however, to identify and remove incorrect information. The need to identify incorrect information provided by an AI chatbot is a skill that students will also increasingly need.

Reference citations should be accurate, complete, and presented in a consistent format. This study analyzed information provided to authors on preparing citations and references for manuscripts submitted to nursing journals (n = 209). Half of the journals used the American Psychological Association reference style. Slightly more than half provided examples of how to cite articles and books; there were fewer examples of citing websites and online journals. Suggestions on improving accuracy of references are discussed.

ObjectivesThe aims of this study are (1) to analyze the references cited by retracted papers originated from paper mills; (2) to analyze the citations received by retracted papers originated from paper mills; and (3) to analyze the potential relationships existing between paper mill papers and their references and their citations. Study Design and SettingThis study was a cross-sectional study. All original papers retracted in 2022 identified as having originated from paper mills and had been published at least 12 months before their retraction (hereinafter “source-retracted papers”) were included. The Retraction Watch database was used to identify the source-retracted papers and Web of Science was used to identify the references contained within them and the citations received by them. We described the characteristics of the papers and journals. Additionally, 2 networks of source-retracted papers mutually interconnected via their citations and references were built: 1 with only retracted references and retracted citations and the other with all references and citations (retracted or unretracted). ResultsA total of 416 paper mill papers retracted in 2022 (sourced retracted papers) were identified, with a median of 1247 (interquartilic range, 907.8–1673.5) days between publication and retraction. Of all authors identified, 92.3% were affiliated with Chinese institutions. There were 14,411 references contained in the source-retracted papers and 8479 citations received by them; the median number of references and citations was 35 (29–40) and 16 (9–25), respectively. In total, 473 references and citations had also been retracted for being paper mill papers. Among the 416 sourced-retracted papers, 169 (41.9%) and 178 (42.8%) were referenced or were cited by at least another retracted paper, the majority of which also originated from paper mills. The first network analysis, which included source-retracted papers along with their retracted references and citations, found 3 clusters of 53, 48, and 44 retracted papers that were mutually interconnected. The second network analysis, with all references and citations (retracted or unretracted) identified a large cluster of 2530 interconnected papers. ConclusionRetracted papers originating from paper mills frequently reference and are cited by papers that are later retracted for having originated from paper mills, displaying inter-relationships. Detecting these inter-relationships can serve as an indicator for identifying potentially fraudulent publications.

This selectively annotated bibliography on Haile Gerima is designed for scholars and emerging researchers of his vast cinematic-intellectual corpus. The bibliography references primary sources by Gerima himself from films, book chapters, and essays, for example. It also references secondary sources that might otherwise be quite difficult to locate on the works of Haile Gerima, such as journal articles, monographs, newspaper features, theses, and film reviews. These resources exist in multiple languages, too, particularly French and Amharic as well as English. For some of the entries, a brief description is provided to preview the content of the work. It is hoped that this bibliography will serve intellectuals across different fields and offer a handy tool for the examination of Haile Gerima's forty-year career in African cinema.

You are nearing the end of the process of writing your scientific paper. You have carefully written a concise introduction, provided a detailed description of your methods, reported your results clearly, and discussed the meaning of your results. You may even have the perfect title and abstract ready to go. But the need to keep your focus and attention to detail remains, because there is still an area where you can stumble and hurt your efforts: the citations and references. Lest you consider references to be a minor component of a paper, consider the fact that the Council of Science Editors devotes 86 pages in their style manual to the proper use of references (1) and the AMA Manual of Style (2) includes 41 pages covering references. During the writing process you compiled a file (a stack of photocopied articles or an electronic database) of previously published papers that directly or indirectly contributed to your study. Therefore, it is important to give credit to (cite) the ideas, methods, and results of others. It is also important to tell readers where they can access documentation of this work (references). A citation (typically a number or the author name and year) inserted in the text identifies material that should be attributed to or associated with previously published work. A corresponding reference documents the original source of the material. Citations and references can be a source of information for readers, but they can also become a source of frustration if not selected and used wisely. So let's go over some basics of the use of citations and references. The ideal time to organize (or perhaps reorganize) the materials you might cite is when you begin writing a paper. Organizing potential references at this stage is useful for several reasons. First, the process allows …

Wikipedia is one of the most visited sites on the Web and a common source of information for many users. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia was not conceived as a source of original information, but as a gateway to secondary sources: according to Wikipedia’s guidelines, facts must be backed up by reliable sources that reflect the full spectrum of views on the topic. Although citations lie at the heart of Wikipedia, little is known about how users interact with them. To close this gap, we built client-side instrumentation for logging all interactions with links leading from English Wikipedia articles to cited references during one month, and conducted the first analysis of readers’ interactions with citations. We find that overall engagement with citations is low: about one in 300 page views results in a reference click (0,29% overall; 0,56% on desktop; 0,13% on mobile). Matched observational studies of the factors associated with reference clicking reveal that clicks occur more frequently on shorter pages and on pages of lower quality, suggesting that references are consulted more commonly when Wikipedia itself does not contain the information sought by the user. Moreover, we observe that recent content, open access sources, and references about life events (births, deaths, marriages, etc.) are particularly popular. Taken together, our findings deepen our understanding of Wikipedia’s role in a global information economy where reliability is ever less certain, and source attribution ever more vital.

Multidisciplinary cooperation is now common in research since social issues inevitably involve multiple disciplines. In research articles, reference information, especially citation content, is an important representation of communication among different disciplines. Analyzing the distribution characteristics of references from different disciplines in research articles is basic to detecting the sources of referred information and identifying contributions of different disciplines. This work takes articles in PLoS as the data and characterizes the references from different disciplines based on Citation Content Analysis (CCA). First, we download 210,334 full-text articles from PLoS and collect the information of the in-text citations. Then, we identify the discipline of each reference in these academic articles. To characterize the distribution of these references, we analyze three characteristics, namely, the number of citations, the average cited intensity and the average citation length. Finally, we conclude that the distributions of references from different disciplines are significantly different. Although most references come from Natural Science, Humanities and Social Sciences play important roles in the Introduction and Background sections of the articles. Basic disciplines, such as Mathematics, mainly provide research methods in the articles in PLoS. Citations mentioned in the Results and Discussion sections of articles are mainly in-discipline citations, such as citations from Nursing and Medicine in PLoS.

• The majority of in-text citations were independent. • The majority of references that had no independent mentions were mentioned only once. • Approximately 20 % of the references did not independently contribute to the citing paper. • Most of the multiple mentioned references had high mention frequencies according to two counting methods. With the development of citation analysis, the analysis of in-text citations is getting more important. There can be many references in the bibliography of a paper, but the way that each reference is mentioned within the full text of a paper is different. Some references are mentioned together with other references, and some references are mentioned alone. That is, a citation sentence can include only one reference or several references. However, the citation sentence gives readers a description. Thus, it is necessary to examine in-text citations by considering the way that each reference is mentioned within the full text. From this point of view, we introduce two counting methods (full counting and fractional counting) to examine in-text citations and compare the two counting methods. The number of in-text citations according to full counting was approximately 1.448 times larger than that according to fractional counting. The results show that the majority of in-text citations are independent, and the majority of references that have no independent mentions are mentioned only once. The results also show that most of the multiple mentioned references have high mention frequencies according to both full counting and fractional counting.

Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, is one of the most visited sites on the Web and a common source of information for many users. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not a source of original information, but was conceived as a gateway to secondary sources: according to Wikipedia's guidelines, facts must be backed up by reliable sources that reflect the full spectrum of views on the topic. Although citations lie at the very heart of Wikipedia, little is known about how users interact with them. To close this gap, we built client-side instrumentation for logging all interactions with links leading from English Wikipedia articles to cited references during one month, and conducted the first analysis of readers' interaction with citations on Wikipedia. We find that overall engagement with citations is low: about one in 300 page views results in a reference click (0.29% overall; 0.56% on desktop; 0.13% on mobile). Matched observational studies of the factors associated with reference clicking reveal that clicks occur more frequently on shorter pages and on pages of lower quality, suggesting that references are consulted more commonly when Wikipedia itself does not contain the information sought by the user. Moreover, we observe that recent content, open access sources and references about life events (births, deaths, marriages, etc) are particularly popular. Taken together, our findings open the door to a deeper understanding of Wikipedia's role in a global information economy where reliability is ever less certain, and source attribution ever more vital.

Citations to scholarly items are building bricks for multidisciplinary science communication. Citation analyses are currently influencing individual career advancement and ranking of academic and research institutions worldwide. This article overviews the involvement of scientific authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, indexers, and learned associations in the citing and referencing to preserve the integrity of science communication. Authors are responsible for thorough bibliographic searches to select relevant references for their articles, comprehend main points, and cite them in an ethical way. Reviewers and editors may perform additional searches and recommend missing essential references. Publishers, in turn, are in a position to instruct their authors over the citations and references, provide tools for validation of references, and open access to bibliographies. Publicly available reference lists bear important information about the novelty and relatedness of the scholarly items with the published literature. Few editorial associations have dealt with the issue of citations and properly managed references. As a prime example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued in December 2014 an updated set of recommendations on the need for citing primary literature and avoiding unethical references, which are applicable to the global scientific community. With the exponential growth of literature and related references, it is critically important to define functions of all stakeholders of science communication in curbing the issue of irrational and unethical citations and thereby improve the quality and indexability of scholarly journals.