References
- 1Athar, A. (2011). Sentiment Analysis of Citations using Sentence Structure-Based Features. Proceedings of the ACL 2011 Student Session, 81–87, P11–3015.
https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P11-3015 - 2Bordignon, F. (2021). A dataset of critical citations contexts. Mendeley Data, V1. DOI: 10.17632/2v5d3bpydb.1
- 3Bordignon, F. (2022). Critical citations in knowledge construction and citation analysis: From paradox to definition. Scientometrics, 127, 959–972. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04226-0
- 4Cano, V. (1989). Citation behavior: Classification, utility, and location. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(4), 284–290. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198907)40:4<;284::AID-ASI10>3.0.CO;2-Z
- 5Catalini, C., Lacetera, N., & Oettl, A. (2015). The incidence and role of negative citations in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(45), 13823–13826. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1502280112
- 6Dong, C., & Schäfer, U. (2011). Ensemble-style Self-training on Citation Classification. Proceedings of 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, 623–631.
https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/I11-1070 - 7Gambette, P. (2024). Scraping-CitaRe (v1.0.2). Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10925183
- 8Hernández Álvarez, M. (2015).
Concit-corpus: Context citation analysis to learn function, polarity and influence (Doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Alicante, Spain).https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/tesis?codigo=61958 - 9Hsiao, T.-K., & Schneider, J. (2021).
Dataset for “Continued use of retracted papers: Temporal trends in citations and (lack of) awareness of retractions shown in citation contexts in biomedicine” . University of Illinois. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-8255619_V2; 10.1162/qss_a_00155 - 10Jochim, C., & Schütze, H. (2012). Towards a Generic and Flexible Citation Classifier Based on a Faceted Classification Scheme. Proceedings of COLING 2012, 1343–1358.
https://aclanthology.org/C12-1082 - 11Lin, C.-S. (2018). An analysis of citation functions in the humanities and social sciences research from the perspective of problematic citation analysis assumptions. Scientometrics, 116(2), 797–813. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2770-2
- 12Moravcsik, M. J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some Results on the Function and Quality of Citations. Social Studies of Science, 5(1), 86–92. DOI: 10.1177/030631277500500106
- 13Oppenheim, C., & Renn, S. P. (1978). Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(5), 225–231. DOI: 10.1002/asi.4630290504
- 14Schneider, J., Ye, D., Hill, A. M., & Whitehorn, A. S. (2020). Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data. Scientometrics, 125(3), 2877–2913. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03631-1
- 15Spiegel-Rosing, I. (1977). Science Studies: Bibliometric and Content Analysis. Social Studies of Science, 7(1), 97–113. DOI: 10.1177/030631277700700111
- 16Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., & Tidhar, D. (2006). Automatic classification of citation function. EMNLP ’06 Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 103–110. DOI: 10.3115/1610075.1610091
- 17Ye, D., Hill, A., Whitehorn (Fulton), A., & Schneider, J. (2020).
Citation context annotation for new and newly found citations (2006–2019) to retracted paper Matsuyama 2005 . University of Illinois. DOI: 10.13012/B2IDB-8150563_V1