↓ Skip to main content

Predictors of Citation Rate in Psychology: Inconclusive Influence of Effect and Sample Size

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predictors of Citation Rate in Psychology: Inconclusive Influence of Effect and Sample Size
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul H. P. Hanel, Jennifer Haase

Abstract

In the present article, we investigate predictors of how often a scientific article is cited. Specifically, we focus on the influence of two often neglected predictors of citation rate: effect size and sample size, using samples from two psychological topical areas. Both can be considered as indicators of the importance of an article and post hoc (or observed) statistical power, and should, especially in applied fields, predict citation rates. In Study 1, effect size did not have an influence on citation rates across a topical area, both with and without controlling for numerous variables that have been previously linked to citation rates. In contrast, sample size predicted citation rates, but only while controlling for other variables. In Study 2, sample and partly effect sizes predicted citation rates, indicating that the relations vary even between scientific topical areas. Statistically significant results had more citations in Study 2 but not in Study 1. The results indicate that the importance (or power) of scientific findings may not be as strongly related to citation rate as is generally assumed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 32%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 26%
Social Sciences 4 21%
Computer Science 3 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,163,864
of 24,793,937 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,329
of 33,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,292
of 317,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#112
of 583 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,793,937 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 583 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.