IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v128y2023i6d10.1007_s11192-023-04703-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A diachronic perspective on citation latency in Wikipedia articles on CRISPR/Cas-9: an exploratory case study

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Schmidt

    (German Center for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW))

  • Wolfgang Kircheis

    (Leipzig University and Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence (ScaDS.AI))

  • Arno Simons

    (Technische Universität Berlin, German Center for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW))

  • Martin Potthast

    (Leipzig University and Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence (ScaDS.AI))

  • Benno Stein

    (Bauhaus-Universität Weimar)

Abstract

This paper analyzes Wikipedia’s representation of the Nobel Prize winning CRISPR/Cas9 technology, a method for gene editing. We propose and evaluate different heuristics to match publications from several publication corpora against Wikipedia’s central article on CRISPR and against the complete Wikipedia revision history in order to retrieve further Wikipedia articles relevant to the topic and to analyze Wikipedia’s referencing patterns. We explore to what extent the selection of referenced literature of Wikipedia’s central article on CRISPR adheres to scientific standards and inner-scientific perspectives by assessing its overlap with (1) the Web of Science (WoS) database, (2) a WoS-based field-delineated corpus, (3) highly-cited publications within this corpus, and (4) publications referenced by field-specific reviews. We develop a diachronic perspective on citation latency and compare the delays with which publications are cited in relevant Wikipedia articles to the citation dynamics of these publications over time. Our results confirm that a combination of verbatim searches by title, DOI, and PMID is sufficient and cannot be improved significantly by more elaborate search heuristics. We show that Wikipedia references a substantial amount of publications that are recognized by experts and highly cited, but that Wikipedia also cites less visible literature, and, to a certain degree, even not strictly scientific literature. Delays in occurrence on Wikipedia compared to the publication years show (most pronounced in case of the central CRISPR article) a dependence on the dynamics of both the field and the editor’s reaction to it in terms of activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Schmidt & Wolfgang Kircheis & Arno Simons & Martin Potthast & Benno Stein, 2023. "A diachronic perspective on citation latency in Wikipedia articles on CRISPR/Cas-9: an exploratory case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3649-3673, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04703-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04703-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04703-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04703-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aida Pooladian & Ángel Borrego, 2017. "Methodological issues in measuring citations in Wikipedia: a case study in Library and Information Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 455-464, October.
    2. Mostafa Mesgari & Chitu Okoli & Mohamad Mehdi & Finn Årup Nielsen & Arto Lanamäki, 2015. "“The sum of all human knowledge”: A systematic review of scholarly research on the content of Wikipedia," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(2), pages 219-245, February.
    3. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Are wikipedia citations important evidence of the impact of scholarly articles and books?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(3), pages 762-779, March.
    4. Misha Teplitskiy & Grace Lu & Eamon Duede, 2017. "Amplifying the impact of open access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(9), pages 2116-2127, September.
    5. Jim Giles, 2005. "Internet encyclopaedias go head to head," Nature, Nature, vol. 438(7070), pages 900-901, December.
    6. Julian H Elliott & Tari Turner & Ornella Clavisi & James Thomas & Julian P T Higgins & Chris Mavergames & Russell L Gruen, 2014. "Living Systematic Reviews: An Emerging Opportunity to Narrow the Evidence-Practice Gap," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-6, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aida Pooladian & Ángel Borrego, 2017. "Methodological issues in measuring citations in Wikipedia: a case study in Library and Information Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 455-464, October.
    2. Charles Ayoubi & Boris Thurm, 2023. "Knowledge diffusion and morality: Why do we freely share valuable information with Strangers?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 75-99, January.
    3. Xiang Zheng & Jiajing Chen & Erjia Yan & Chaoqun Ni, 2023. "Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(2), pages 219-233, February.
    4. Derksen, Laura & Michaud-Leclerc, Catherine & Souza, Pedro C.L., 2022. "Restricted access: How the internet can be used to promote reading and learning," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Bo-Christer Björk & Sari Kanto-Karvonen & J. Tuomas Harviainen, 2020. "How Frequently Are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, March.
    6. Xi Zhang & Xianhai Wang & Hongke Zhao & Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos & Yongqiang Sun & Hui Xiong, 2019. "An effectiveness analysis of altmetrics indices for different levels of artificial intelligence publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1311-1344, June.
    7. Wei Luo & Julia Adams & Hannah Brueckner, 2018. "The Ladies Vanish? American Sociology and the Genealogy of its Missing Women on Wikipedia," Working Papers 20180012, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2018.
    8. Aaltonen, Aleksi Ville & Seiler, Stephan, 2014. "Quantifying spillovers in open source content production: evidence from Wikipedia," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60284, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Demidov, Denis & Frahm, Klaus M. & Shepelyansky, Dima L., 2020. "What is the central bank of Wikipedia?," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 542(C).
    10. Suddaby, Roy & Ganzin, Max & Minkus, Alison, 2017. "Craft, magic and the re-enchantment of the world," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 285-296.
    11. Hervé, Fabrice & Zouaoui, Mohamed & Belvaux, Bertrand, 2019. "Noise traders and smart money: Evidence from online searches," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 141-149.
    12. Nicolas Jullien, 2012. "What We Know About Wikipedia: A Review of the Literature Analyzing the Project(s)," Post-Print hal-00857208, HAL.
    13. Gheorghe-Gavrilă Hognogi & Ana-Maria Pop, 2024. "Something old, new, and borrowed. Rise of the systematic reviews," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5797-5803, September.
    14. Ewa S. Callahan & Susan C. Herring, 2011. "Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1899-1915, October.
    15. Mingyang Wang & Zhenyu Wang & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Which can better predict the future success of articles? Bibliometric indices or alternative metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1575-1595, June.
    16. Manh-Toan Ho & Ngoc-Thang B. Le & Manh-Tung Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2022. "A bibliometric review on development economics research in Vietnam from 2008 to 2020," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 2939-2969, October.
    17. Guillaume Cabanac & Theodora Oikonomidi & Isabelle Boutron, 2021. "Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5285-5304, June.
    18. Derksen, Laura & Leclerc, Catherine Michaud & Souza, Pedro CL, 2019. "Searching for Answers : The Impact of Student Access to Wikipedia," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1236, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    19. Philipp Poschmann & Jan Goldenstein, 2022. "Disambiguating and Specifying Social Actors in Big Data: Using Wikipedia as a Data Source for Demographic Information," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 887-925, May.
    20. Sergio Copiello, 2019. "The open access citation premium may depend on the openness and inclusiveness of the indexing database, but the relationship is controversial because it is ambiguous where the open access boundary lie," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 995-1018, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04703-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.