4 ms·
This has already been studied. Negative citations are vanishingly rare. So virtually all of them will be either neutral or positive.
by nvm0n2 3y ago
This has already been studied. Negative citations are vanishingly rare. So virtually all of them will be either neutral or positive.
- photonthug 3y agoApplications to case law might be interesting since establishing precedent is somewhat more nonbinary
- jll29 3y ago> Sometimes I see papers with 2,000 citations and I wonder: how many of those are dis/agreeing with the paper. One example of an author that is very influential, despite causing a lot of disagreement (even in more than one discipline) is Noam Chomsky, who is also the most cited person alive, and the second most cited person in recorded history after Aristotle. His views about generative grammar are in part revolutionary, in part plain wrong; your assessment of his views about the Palestine conflict and U.S. foreign politics will largely depend on your political leanings; and his contribution to formal language theory is fundamental regardless of your leanings (Chomsky hierarchy; Chomsky Normal Form). > This has already been studied. Negative citations are vanishingly rare. So virtually all of them will be either neutral or positive. Might be a difference between science/engineering (where true) and humanities (where a larger amount is negative).
- melagonster 3y agosounds like biologists cites Darwin. if you find something he did not find, cool; if your region is similar to him, cooler :) I guess most of conditions is because when biologists debate, they only have one opponent.
- brutusborn 3y agoKnow any good papers on this?
- nvm0n2 3y agohttps://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1502280112 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1502280112 Out of 762,355 citations from 15,731 articles in the Journal of Immunology (1998–2007), we identified 18,304 as negative (about 2.4% of the total).