Past, Present, and Future of Citation Practices in HCI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.16526v7
• Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 13:10:52 GMT
• Title: Past, Present, and Future of Citation Practices in HCI
• Authors: Jonas Oppenlaender,
• Abstract summary: We show how a change in editorial policies introduced at the ACM CHI Conference in 2016 destabilized the CHI research community. If this near-linear trend continues undisrupted, an article at CHI 2030 will include on average almost 130 references. Our exploratory analysis highlights the profound impact of meso-level policy adjustments on the evolution of scientific fields and disciplines.
• Score: 5.498355194100662
• License:
• Abstract: Science is a complex system comprised of many scientists who individually make decisions that, due to the size and nature of the academic system, largely do not affect the system as a whole. However, certain decisions at the meso-level of research communities, such as the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community, may result in deep and long-lasting behavioral changes in scientists. In this article, we provide empirical evidence on how a change in editorial policies introduced at the ACM CHI Conference in 2016 destabilized the CHI research community and launched it on an expansive path, denoted by a year-by-year increase in the mean number of references included in CHI articles. If this near-linear trend continues undisrupted, an article at CHI 2030 will include on average almost 130 references. The trend toward more citations reflects a citation culture where quantity is prioritized over quality, contributing to both author and peer reviewer fatigue. Our exploratory analysis highlights the profound impact of meso-level policy adjustments on the evolution of scientific fields and disciplines, urging all stakeholders to carefully consider the broader implications of such changes.

Related papers

• Optimizing Research Portfolio For Semantic Impact [55.2480439325792]
  Citation metrics are widely used to assess academic impact but suffer from social biases. We introduce rXiv Semantic Impact (XSI), a novel framework that predicts research impact. XSI tracks the evolution of research concepts in the academic knowledge graph.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T17:44:13Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently. Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• Cultural Differences and Perverse Incentives in Science Create a Bad Mix: Exploring Country-Level Publication Bias in Select ACM Conferences [0.0789257770465417]
  National governments are helping to build well-funded teams of scientists to serve nationalistic ambitions. We have found evidence that indicates significant inequality among the publication rates of individual scientists from various countries. Scientists who were affiliated with the top-5 countries were found to be contributing significantly more to the inequality in publication rates than others.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T18:52:59Z)
• Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers [99.67983375899719]
  We conduct the first systematic, large-scale analysis across 950,965 papers published between January 2020 and February 2024 on the arXiv, bioRxiv, and Nature portfolio journals. Our findings reveal a steady increase in LLM usage, with the largest and fastest growth observed in Computer Science papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-01T17:45:15Z)
• Position: AI/ML Influencers Have a Place in the Academic Process [82.2069685579588]
  We investigate the role of social media influencers in enhancing the visibility of machine learning research. We have compiled a comprehensive dataset of over 8,000 papers, spanning tweets from December 2018 to October 2023. Our statistical and causal inference analysis reveals a significant increase in citations for papers endorsed by these influencers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T20:05:49Z)
• Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
  We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
• Diversity of Expertise is Key to Scientific Impact: a Large-Scale Analysis in the Field of Computer Science [1.8794304012790348]
  We analysed how the diversity of research fields within a research team relates to the number of citations their papers received in the upcoming 5 years. This suggests that, at least in Computer Science, diversity of expertise is key to scientific impact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T09:56:44Z)
• The Concept of Decentralization Through Time and Disciplines: A Quantitative Exploration [0.0]
  We analyse 425,144 academic publications that refer to (de)centralization. We find that the fraction of papers on the topic has been exponentially increasing since the 1950s. In 2021, 1 author in 154 mentioned (de)centralization in the title or abstract of an article.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-28T17:46:46Z)
• Fairness in Recommender Systems: Research Landscape and Future Directions [119.67643184567623]
  We review the concepts and notions of fairness that were put forward in the area in the recent past. We present an overview of how research in this field is currently operationalized. Overall, our analysis of recent works points to certain research gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T08:34:25Z)
• Change Summarization of Diachronic Scholarly Paper Collections by Semantic Evolution Analysis [10.554831859741851]
  We demonstrate a novel approach to analyze the collections of research papers published over longer time periods. Our approach is based on comparing word semantic representations over time and aims to support users in a better understanding of large domain-focused archives of scholarly publications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-07T11:15:19Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.