1. DECIDING PERTINENT CITATIONS IN PUBLISHED EMPIRICAL ARTICLES
Time: 01:57
DECIDING PERTINENT CITATIONS IN PUBLISHED EMPIRICAL ARTICLES By
ADEDAYO, Adeleke Victor,
Institute of Technology, Ilorin, NIGERIA
July 29, 2018

2. 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Bibliometrics in Research Evaluation
Time:01:57
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Bibliometrics in Research Evaluation
Research evaluation has gained widespread importance all over the world. Although, there are various methodologies adopted and used in research evaluations, however, bibliometric assessment involving some forms of citation analytics is reputed to be the prominent methodology. Despite the prominence of bibliometrics, many deficiencies have been identified with its usage.
1.2 The Present Study, and the Rationale
• One approach proposed as solution to many problems of bibliometrics is through citation of only earlier works pertinent to the theme of the new manuscript. In this study, a scheme to decide pertinence of citations in empirical articles is presented.
• The idea presented is one of the first attempts to determine pertinence of citations in scientific publications. Herein, the rationale for the study is identified.

3. 2.0 Methodology 2.1 The Protocol
Time:01:57
2.0 Methodology
2.1 The Protocol
• The approach methodology for the study follows from the simple protocol which identifies only citations made in other sections of empirical articles as citations having real pertinence, while citations made in introduction and literature review sections are considered as citations having imagined pertinence.
• Pertinence was determined as the percentage ratio of common citations cited both in introduction and in the real sections to total number of citations made within the introduction sections of empirical articles.
i.e. P = 100(n/N); where P = pertinence (%); n = common citations
N = total number of citations in the introduction sections
2.2 The Material
This approach was used to study citation pattern in articles published from 1999 to 2007 in Indian Journal of Chemistry A.

4. Time:01:57
3.0 Results

5. Time:01:57
Results cont’d

6. Time:01:57
Results cont’d

7. Time:01:57
4.0 Discussion
• The overview of pertinence variation within the articles as shown in Figure 1 revealed that majority of the articles has low pertinence values. Actually, over 95% of the articles have pertinences below 50%.
• The frequency distribution of citations with imagined pertinence; within the articles as shown in Figure 2 also revealed that it is more probable that authors will cite between five (5) to twenty five (25) articles within the imaginary sections (viz introduction). The probability that articles will have many citations with imagined pertinence reduces
• Similarly, as shown in Figure 3, the frequency distribution of common citation made both in the imaginary sections and the real sections of the articles reduce. Mostly, articles have less than six (6) citations which were cited both in the imaginary and the real sections.
• Overal, the average pertinence for the study is 18%. This implies that about 80% of the citations made in the imaginary sections of the articles have not validly supported the methods, conclusions, results and discussions of the studies where they were cited

8. Time:01:57
5.0 Conclusion
The significant proportion of citations made in introduction sections of scientific articles only has imagined pertinence. Overall, average pertinence for the study is less than 20%

9. Time:01:57
THANK YOU!