Unverified History: An Analysis of Quotation Accuracy in Leading History Journals
Abstract
The accurate use of references is vital to the academic search for truth. Despite this, previous bibliometric studies of many academic journals suggest that approximately 25% of references do not substantiate the propositions for which they are cited. This lack of substantiation is termed a “quotation error.” This paper presents the first assessment of quotation errors in history journals. Researchers compared articles in five leading journals with the references they cited, finding an error rate of 24.27%. Due to research difficulties posed by some citation conventions in history journals, this number likely underestimates the actual prevalence of errors. Additionally, this paper provides several potential methods for decreasing errors and improving the feasibility of future quotation error reviews.
Description
item.page.type
Article
item.page.format
Keywords
Citation
Cumberledge, A., Smith, N., Jr., & Riley, B. W. (2023). Unverified history: An analysis of quotation accuracy in leading history journals. Scientometrics, 128, 4677-4687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04755-w