Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Using Citation Behavior to Rethink Academic Impact in Software Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
2015 (English)In: ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 2015, 140-43 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
Resource type
Text
Abstract [en]

Although citation counts are often considered a measure of academic impact, they are criticized for failing to evaluate impact as intended. In this paper we propose that software engineering citations may be classified according to how the citation is used by the author of the citing paper, and that through this classification of citation behaviour it is possible to achieve a more refined understanding of the cited paper’s impact. Our objective in this work is to conduct an initial evaluation using the citation behaviour taxonomy proposed by Bornmann and Daniel. We independently classified citations to ten highly-cited papers published at the International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). The degree to which classifications were consistent between researchers was analyzed in order to assess the clarity of Bornmann and Daniel’s taxonomy. We found poor to fair agreement between researchers even though the taxonomy was perceived as relatively easy to apply for the majority of citations. We were nevertheless able to identify clear differences in the profile of citation behaviors between the cited papers. We conclude that an improved taxonomy is required if classification is to be reliable, and that a degree of automation would improve reliability as well as reduce the time taken to make a classification.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. 140-43 p.
Series
ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ISSN 1938-6451
Keyword [en]
citation analysis;pattern classification;software engineering;ESEM;International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement;academic impact evaluation;citation behavior classification;citation behaviour taxonomy;software engineering;Bibliometrics;Context;Data collection;Reliability;Software engineering;Software measurement;Taxonomy
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-11199DOI: 10.1109/ESEM.2015.7321216ISI: 000376497300020ISBN: 978-1-4673-7899-4 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-11199DiVA: diva2:882975
Conference
ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), Beijing
Available from: 2015-12-16 Created: 2015-12-14 Last updated: 2017-03-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Poulding, SimonPetersen, KaiFeldt, Robert
By organisation
Department of Software Engineering
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 28 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf