Phys.org June 1, 2022
Citations and text analysis are both used to study the distribution and flow of ideas between researchers, fields, and countries, but the resulting flows are rarely equal. A team of researchers in the US (City University of New York, UCLA, Stanford University) argues that the differences in these two flows capture a growing global inequality in the production of scientific knowledge. They offered a framework called ‘citational lensing’ to identify where citations should appear between countries but are absent given that what is embedded in their published abstract texts is highly similar. This framework also identifies where citations are overabundant given lower similarity. Their data came from nearly 20 million papers across nearly 35 years and 150 fields from the Microsoft Academic Graph. They found that scientific communities increasingly centre research from highly active countries while overlooking work from peripheral countries. This inequality is likely to pose substantial challenges to the growth of novel ideas…read more. Open Access TECHNICAL ARTICLEÂ
Comparing global citational distortion over time. Credit: Nature Human Behaviour (2022)Â