Automated citation recommendation tools encourage questionable citations

Research Evaluation, vol. 31, pp. 321–325

Abstract

Abstract Citing practices have long been at the heart of scientific reporting, playing both socially and epistemically important functions in science. While such practices have been relatively stable over time, recent attempts to develop automated citation recommendation tools have the potential to drastically impact citing practices. We claim that, even though such tools may come with tempting advantages, their development and implementation should be conducted with caution. Describing the role of citations in science’s current publishing and social reward structures, we argue that automated citation tools encourage questionable citing practices. More specifically, we describe how such tools may lead to an increase in: perfunctory citation and sloppy argumentation; affirmation biases; and Matthew effects. In addition, a lack of transparency of the tools’ underlying algorithmic structure renders their usage problematic. Hence, we urge that the consequences of citation recommendation tools should at least be understood and assessed before any attempts to implementation or broad distribution are undertaken.

Authors 4

1. Serge P. J. M. Horbach corresponding Aachen Faculty of Social Sciences Centre for Science and Technology Studies

   Leiden University · Aarhus University

   Affiliation as printed

   Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Aarhus University , Bartholins Allé 7 , Aarhus C 8000, Denmark

   Faculty of Social Sciences, Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University , Wassenaarseweg 62A , Leiden 2333 AL, The Netherlands

   Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Faculty of Social Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 62A, 2333 AL Leiden, The Netherlands

2. Freek Oude Maatman

   Radboud University Nijmegen · University of Groningen

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Philosophy of Behavioural Science, Faculty of Social Science, Radboud University Nijmegen ,Thomas van Aquinostraat 4, Nijmegen, 6500 HE, The Netherlands

   Department of Theoretical Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Groningen , Oude Boteringestraat 52, Groningen, 9712 GL, The Netherlands

3. Willem Halffman

   Radboud University Nijmegen

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute for Science in Society, Radboud University Nijmegen , Heyendaalseweg 135, Nijmegen, 6525AJ, The Netherlands

4. Wytske M. Hepkema

   Radboud University Nijmegen

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute for Science in Society, Radboud University Nijmegen , Heyendaalseweg 135, Nijmegen, 6525AJ, The Netherlands