Fewer Studies Cited in Internet Age
A study of millions of journal articles finds that the availability of info online has paradoxically led to fewer studies being cited. Christopher Intagliata reports
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
Not too long ago, scientists had to hoof it to the library to review the literature. And they had to flip through a card catalog to find that dusty old volume with the article they wanted. Not so today—the internet’s made things a lot easier. But maybe it’s a bit too easy. That’s what one sociologist writes in the latest issue of Science.
He analyzed a database of 34 million scholarly articles and their citations, spanning six decades of research. The conclusion? He says articles from the online age actually cite fewer studies, from a shrinking pool of journals. And the same popular studies are mentioned over and over. It’s a bit counterintuitive, considering the internet’s made more articles available than ever before.
So what’s going on? First, internet searches are really precise. Scientists might miss tangential stuff they would have encountered browsing through a print journal. And the author says the internet leads scientists to the most popular, talked-about research—which could overshadow the lone dissenter. But perhaps the joy that scientists find in arguing with each other can be counted on to keep the enterprise from turning into an echo chamber.
60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
