+1 Recommend
2 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Predictors of Citation Rate in Psychology: Inconclusive Influence of Effect and Sample Size


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          In the present article, we investigate predictors of how often a scientific article is cited. Specifically, we focus on the influence of two often neglected predictors of citation rate: effect size and sample size, using samples from two psychological topical areas. Both can be considered as indicators of the importance of an article and post hoc (or observed) statistical power, and should, especially in applied fields, predict citation rates. In Study 1, effect size did not have an influence on citation rates across a topical area, both with and without controlling for numerous variables that have been previously linked to citation rates. In contrast, sample size predicted citation rates, but only while controlling for other variables. In Study 2, sample and partly effect sizes predicted citation rates, indicating that the relations vary even between scientific topical areas. Statistically significant results had more citations in Study 2 but not in Study 1. The results indicate that the importance (or power) of scientific findings may not be as strongly related to citation rate as is generally assumed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dealing with feeling: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation.

          The present meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation in modifying emotional outcomes as indexed by experiential, behavioral, and physiological measures. A systematic search of the literature identified 306 experimental comparisons of different emotion regulation (ER) strategies. ER instructions were coded according to a new taxonomy, and meta-analysis was used to evaluate the effectiveness of each strategy across studies. The findings revealed differences in effectiveness between ER processes: Attentional deployment had no effect on emotional outcomes (d(+) = 0.00), response modulation had a small effect (d(+) = 0.16), and cognitive change had a small-to-medium effect (d(+) = 0.36). There were also important within-process differences. We identified 7 types of attentional deployment, 4 types of cognitive change, and 4 types of response modulation, and these distinctions had a substantial influence on effectiveness. Whereas distraction was an effective way to regulate emotions (d(+) = 0.27), concentration was not (d(+) = -0.26). Similarly, suppressing the expression of emotion proved effective (d(+) = 0.32), but suppressing the experience of emotion or suppressing thoughts of the emotion-eliciting event did not (d(+) = -0.04 and -0.12, respectively). Finally, reappraising the emotional response proved less effective (d(+) = 0.23) than reappraising the emotional stimulus (d(+) = 0.36) or using perspective taking (d(+) = 0.45). The review also identified several moderators of strategy effectiveness including factors related to the (a) to-be-regulated emotion, (b) frequency of use and intended purpose of the ER strategy, (c) study design, and (d) study characteristics.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described.

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sharing Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate

              Background Sharing research data provides benefit to the general scientific community, but the benefit is less obvious for the investigator who makes his or her data available. Principal Findings We examined the citation history of 85 cancer microarray clinical trial publications with respect to the availability of their data. The 48% of trials with publicly available microarray data received 85% of the aggregate citations. Publicly available data was significantly (p = 0.006) associated with a 69% increase in citations, independently of journal impact factor, date of publication, and author country of origin using linear regression. Significance This correlation between publicly available data and increased literature impact may further motivate investigators to share their detailed research data.

                Author and article information

                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                11 July 2017
                : 8
                [1] 1School of Psychology, Cardiff University Cardiff, United Kingdom
                [2] 2Department of Psychology, University of Bath Claverton Down, United Kingdom
                [3] 3Department of Psychology, Lund University Lund, Sweden
                Author notes

                Edited by: Igor Grossmann, University of Waterloo, Canada

                Reviewed by: Tera D. Letzring, Idaho State University, United States; Joseph Hilgard, University of Pennsylvania, United States

                *Correspondence: Paul H. P. Hanel, p.hanel@ 123456bath.ac.uk

                This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Copyright © 2017 Hanel and Haase.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 62, Pages: 11, Words: 0
                Funded by: Economic and Social Research Council 10.13039/501100000269
                Award ID: ES/J500197/1
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                citation rate,citation frequency,effect size,sample size,power,open access,journal impact factor,statistical significance


                Comment on this article