Meta-Research: How problematic citing practices distort science

Abstract

Citing practices constitute a core element in scientific research and communication in which they serve several important functions. They both comprise the principal unit of science’s social reward system and they establish epistemic genealogy, showing the foundations on which claims are built. Distorted or problematic citing behaviour can hence have major harmful consequences for the well-functioning of the scientific enterprise. In this article we employ a case study approach to show how, even in the field of research integrity, or more broadly, meta-research, researchers commonly adhere to suboptimal citing practices. Our findings highlight, among other shortcomings, an apparent lack of critical engagement with the cited literature, leading to incorrect reproductions of claims and overgeneralisation of supposed research findings. We link such problematic citing practices to the state of crisis that science is currently claimed to face, discussing how these practices might be both a symptom and a cause of these crises.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.