References-Citations Relationship

[Karen Medina]

Given: Research tends to generalize previous research findings.

I would tend to think that an author writing in a very specific
subfield would have to read a lot more in order to cite more, and less
of those readings would be applicable.

The less specific the field the author is writing in, the easier it is
to cite more.

-karen medina

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Ronald Rousseau
<ronald.rousseau at khbo.be> wrote:
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I believe in the following scenario. An article that deals with several
> topics (is related to several subfields) has a higher probability of being
> useful (i.e. being cited) to at least one subfield than an article that is
> related to just one subfield. It is, moreover, probably richer in ideas.
>
> Moreover, an article related to several subfields has on average a longer
> reference list than an article dealing with one topic (or related to one
> subfield).
>
> Hence, there might be a relation between longer reference lists and
> receiving more citations, although the length of the reference list itself
> is not the cause of this relationship.
>
> Who proves or disproves this conjecture?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ronald Rousseau