On Publication Ethics—Journals, Please Get Rid of Wording Restrictions That Include Citations

IF 1.3 4区 生物学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Ethology Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1111/eth.13550
Wolfgang Goymann
{"title":"On Publication Ethics—Journals, Please Get Rid of Wording Restrictions That Include Citations","authors":"Wolfgang Goymann","doi":"10.1111/eth.13550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>“Damn, they didn't cite me!” Do you know this feeling? Honestly, I have experienced such a wave of anger and disappointment quite often when reading papers close to my field. In some cases, I felt so wronged that I sent a friendly email to the authors reminding them of my work. Maybe they just did not know about it? Maybe they did a poor job of searching for the relevant literature? Or they thought my work was not of sufficient quality to be cited? Or is it that I keep choosing the wrong keywords so that no one can find my studies? I am sure, others will have thought the same about some of my papers, that is I did not cite their work even though it was relevant.</p><p>There are many reasons why relevant publications are not cited. In the worst case, it can be scientific misconduct, that is authors deliberately fail to cite other people's work when they know it is relevant and should be cited. I am convinced, however, that this is only a minority of cases. In recent decades, the number of scientific studies (and journals) has kind of exploded, making it difficult to keep up with developments even within one's own field. Combined with a poor literature search, this can lead to the omission of relevant work. Further, instead of searching for relevant literature themselves, many people rely on reviews, but this means that the quality of the respective review determines whether readers find the relevant literature to cite. Plus, there may be a good number of other reasons why studies are not cited, but I want to focus on one important cause that is in the responsibility of publishers.</p><p>Many journals, especially such with a high impact, have word limits for their articles. In principle, this is fine, as it forces authors to write in a concise and focused manner. However, the word limit often includes the references. In my view, this is plain wrong and should never happen. When the word limit includes references, it is of course much easier for authors to shorten their articles simply by omitting references rather than by reducing their text: eliminating 10 or so references can easily save 150 and more words. In other cases, journals do not include citations in their word limit, but instead they limit the allowed number of references as such. This basically means that the journal forces authors to actively exclude potentially relevant references. In the worst case, such a reference limit is even requested for review articles, whose main purpose should be to provide an overview by including ideally all of the relevant citations.</p><p>Sometimes, the authors of articles that did not cite my work responded to my emails. In a few cases, they stated that they were not aware of my work and were grateful that I had brought it to their attention. In most cases, however, they said that they had to focus on the most relevant citations because of word limits or restrictions on the number of citations allowed. And of course, they and I may disagree about what are the most relevant papers to cite…</p><p>So, what to do? In the past, journals may have had better reasons to argue for word limits that include citations. Printing costs were high, and individual journal issues had to be kept within a printable range. But in the age of online publishing, does it really matter if the PDF has one or two extra pages of references? I think not! Reputable journals should skip the word limit for citations or restrictions with regard to the number of citations allowed.</p><p>Finally, what can we do as individual researchers? First of all, we should not take wording restrictions for granted. Usually, journal editors will make exceptions if you give good reasons (albeit some high impact journals may not). But there is more we can do. If you are a member of a scientific society that owns or publishes a journal with word limits including citations, talk to the society's board and to the editors of the journal. It should not be a big deal to change rules that encourage (unintended) scientific fraud and leave many people wondering why their relevant papers have not been cited. Needless to say, <i>Ethology</i> has no such wording restrictions…</p><p><b>Wolfgang Goymann</b> is the Editor-in-Chief of Ethology and author of this article. WG was excluded from all editorial decisions related to the publication of this article.</p><p>The author declares no conflicts of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":50494,"journal":{"name":"Ethology","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eth.13550","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eth.13550","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

“Damn, they didn't cite me!” Do you know this feeling? Honestly, I have experienced such a wave of anger and disappointment quite often when reading papers close to my field. In some cases, I felt so wronged that I sent a friendly email to the authors reminding them of my work. Maybe they just did not know about it? Maybe they did a poor job of searching for the relevant literature? Or they thought my work was not of sufficient quality to be cited? Or is it that I keep choosing the wrong keywords so that no one can find my studies? I am sure, others will have thought the same about some of my papers, that is I did not cite their work even though it was relevant.

There are many reasons why relevant publications are not cited. In the worst case, it can be scientific misconduct, that is authors deliberately fail to cite other people's work when they know it is relevant and should be cited. I am convinced, however, that this is only a minority of cases. In recent decades, the number of scientific studies (and journals) has kind of exploded, making it difficult to keep up with developments even within one's own field. Combined with a poor literature search, this can lead to the omission of relevant work. Further, instead of searching for relevant literature themselves, many people rely on reviews, but this means that the quality of the respective review determines whether readers find the relevant literature to cite. Plus, there may be a good number of other reasons why studies are not cited, but I want to focus on one important cause that is in the responsibility of publishers.

Many journals, especially such with a high impact, have word limits for their articles. In principle, this is fine, as it forces authors to write in a concise and focused manner. However, the word limit often includes the references. In my view, this is plain wrong and should never happen. When the word limit includes references, it is of course much easier for authors to shorten their articles simply by omitting references rather than by reducing their text: eliminating 10 or so references can easily save 150 and more words. In other cases, journals do not include citations in their word limit, but instead they limit the allowed number of references as such. This basically means that the journal forces authors to actively exclude potentially relevant references. In the worst case, such a reference limit is even requested for review articles, whose main purpose should be to provide an overview by including ideally all of the relevant citations.

Sometimes, the authors of articles that did not cite my work responded to my emails. In a few cases, they stated that they were not aware of my work and were grateful that I had brought it to their attention. In most cases, however, they said that they had to focus on the most relevant citations because of word limits or restrictions on the number of citations allowed. And of course, they and I may disagree about what are the most relevant papers to cite…

So, what to do? In the past, journals may have had better reasons to argue for word limits that include citations. Printing costs were high, and individual journal issues had to be kept within a printable range. But in the age of online publishing, does it really matter if the PDF has one or two extra pages of references? I think not! Reputable journals should skip the word limit for citations or restrictions with regard to the number of citations allowed.

Finally, what can we do as individual researchers? First of all, we should not take wording restrictions for granted. Usually, journal editors will make exceptions if you give good reasons (albeit some high impact journals may not). But there is more we can do. If you are a member of a scientific society that owns or publishes a journal with word limits including citations, talk to the society's board and to the editors of the journal. It should not be a big deal to change rules that encourage (unintended) scientific fraud and leave many people wondering why their relevant papers have not been cited. Needless to say, Ethology has no such wording restrictions…

Wolfgang Goymann is the Editor-in-Chief of Ethology and author of this article. WG was excluded from all editorial decisions related to the publication of this article.

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

论出版伦理——期刊,请摆脱包括引文在内的措辞限制
“该死,他们竟然没有传唤我!”你知道这种感觉吗?老实说,当我阅读与我的研究领域相关的论文时,我经常会经历这样一波愤怒和失望。在某些情况下,我感到非常委屈,所以我给作者发了一封友好的电子邮件,提醒他们我的工作。也许他们只是不知道这件事?也许他们在搜索相关文献方面做得很差?或者他们认为我的工作质量不够,不能被引用?还是我一直选择错误的关键词,以至于没有人能找到我的研究?我敢肯定,其他人也会对我的一些论文有同样的看法,那就是我没有引用他们的工作,即使它是相关的。相关出版物未被引用的原因有很多。在最坏的情况下,它可能是科学不端行为,即作者故意不引用别人的工作,尽管他们知道它是相关的,应该被引用。然而,我确信这只是少数情况。近几十年来,科学研究(和期刊)的数量呈爆炸式增长,这使得即使在自己的领域内也很难跟上发展。再加上文献检索不佳,这可能导致相关工作的遗漏。此外,许多人不是自己搜索相关文献,而是依靠综述,但这意味着各自综述的质量决定了读者是否能找到相关文献来引用。此外,可能还有很多其他原因导致研究没有被引用,但我想把重点放在一个重要原因上,那就是出版商的责任。许多期刊,特别是那些具有高影响力的期刊,对其文章有字数限制。原则上,这是好的,因为它迫使作者以简洁和集中的方式写作。然而,字数限制通常包括参考文献。在我看来,这是完全错误的,不应该发生。当字数限制包括参考文献时,作者当然更容易通过省略参考文献而不是减少文本来缩短文章:删除10个左右的参考文献可以轻松节省150个甚至更多的单词。在其他情况下,期刊在字数限制中不包括引文,而是限制允许的参考文献数量。这基本上意味着期刊强迫作者主动排除可能相关的参考文献。在最坏的情况下,审查文章甚至需要这样的参考限制,其主要目的应该是通过理想情况下包括所有相关引用来提供概述。有时候,没有引用我作品的文章的作者会回复我的邮件。在少数情况下,他们说他们不知道我的工作,并对我提请他们注意表示感谢。然而,在大多数情况下,他们表示,由于字数限制或允许的引用次数限制,他们不得不关注最相关的引文。当然,他们和我可能不同意哪些论文是最相关的,所以,该怎么做呢?在过去,期刊可能有更好的理由来争论包括引用在内的字数限制。印刷成本很高,而且每期期刊必须保持在可印刷的范围内。但是在在线出版的时代,PDF是否有一页或两页额外的参考文献真的重要吗?我不这么认为!声誉良好的期刊应该跳过引文字数限制或允许引用次数的限制。最后,作为个体研究者,我们能做些什么?首先,我们不应将措辞限制视为理所当然。通常情况下,如果你给出了充分的理由,期刊编辑会例外(尽管一些高影响力的期刊可能不会)。但我们可以做的还有很多。如果你是一个拥有或出版有字数限制(包括引用)的期刊的科学协会的成员,请与该协会的董事会和期刊的编辑交谈。改变鼓励(无意的)科学欺诈的规则,让许多人想知道为什么他们的相关论文没有被引用,不应该是一件大事。不用说,《动物行为学》没有这样的措辞限制……沃尔夫冈·戈曼是《动物行为学》的主编,也是本文的作者。WG被排除在与这篇文章发表相关的所有编辑决定之外。作者声明无利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethology
Ethology 生物-动物学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
89
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: International in scope, Ethology publishes original research on behaviour including physiological mechanisms, function, and evolution. The Journal addresses behaviour in all species, from slime moulds to humans. Experimental research is preferred, both from the field and the lab, which is grounded in a theoretical framework. The section ''Perspectives and Current Debates'' provides an overview of the field and may include theoretical investigations and essays on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信