On the public citation graph

The Originality Paradox: Papers with High Originality Receive Fewer Citations from the Lens of Environmental Research

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5868077
0 signed · 28 inferred · view as graph

Inferred edges come from two machine sources: sweeps of open repository metadata (mostly SSRN and Zenodo), and a bulk OpenAlex citation snapshot. Every row below is labelled with the one it came from. Neither is a complete citation index — absence here is not evidence of absence.

Is this your work? Sign in with ORCID and put your name on the claims that are yours.
Claim with ORCID
Reference health. See whether every reference in this work resolves to a known work and none has been retracted — and get a dated CiteStamped badge you can embed.
See reference health

What this work says

Outgoing claims: the papers this work cites, builds on, or argues with.

inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458392openalex-snapshot
The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458472openalex-snapshot
A compendium of issues for citation analysis
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0130-0openalex-snapshot
Exploring the analytical potential of comparing citing and cited source items
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03263-0openalex-snapshot
Measuring originality in science
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03583-6openalex-snapshot
Using neural-network based paragraph embeddings for the calculation of within and between document similarities
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.02.003openalex-snapshot
On the centrality of peripheral research and the dangers of tight boundary gatekeeping
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2010.03.003openalex-snapshot
The predictive validity of peer review: A selective review of the judgmental forecasting qualities of peers, and implications for innovation in science
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.001openalex-snapshot
Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.06.006openalex-snapshot
Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.08.014openalex-snapshot
Competing innovation systems and the need for redeployment in sustainability transitions
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1017/s0269888917000029openalex-snapshot
The state of the art in semantic relatedness: a framework for comparison
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0941-9openalex-snapshot
Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05543-xopenalex-snapshot
Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46050-xopenalex-snapshot
Early-career factors largely determine the future impact of prominent researchers: evidence across eight scientific fields
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01267-5openalex-snapshot
Investigating patterns of change, stability, and interaction among scientific disciplines using embeddings
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bit022openalex-snapshot
Achieving Research Excellence and Citation Success: What's the Point and How Do You Do It?
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-02-2015-0086openalex-snapshot
Citation classics published in Knowledge Management journals. Part II: studying research trends and discovering the Google Scholar Effect
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1145/3440755openalex-snapshot
Evolution of Semantic Similarity—A Survey
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00089openalex-snapshot
How can citation impact in bibliometrics be normalized? A new approach combining citing-side normalization and citation percentiles
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900203openalex-snapshot
What is Originality in the Humanities and the Social Sciences?
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243916656919openalex-snapshot
Peer Review and Scholarly Originality
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551517724685openalex-snapshot
The effects of the research excellence framework research impact agenda on early- and mid-career researchers in library and information science
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1177/030631287017002004openalex-snapshot
Limitations of Co-Citation Analysis as a Tool for Science Policy
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531119878964openalex-snapshot
Side Effects of Large-Scale Assessments in Education
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2366openalex-snapshot
A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089openalex-snapshot
Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003480openalex-snapshot
Does the Committee Peer Review Select the Best Applicants for Funding? An Investigation of the Selection Process for Two European Molecular Biology Organization Programmes
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.24193/subbmusica.2022.1.11openalex-snapshot
THE ASSESSMENT OF ORIGINALITY IN ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Editorial review for independent work. ICSAC — the Institute for Complexity Science and Advanced Computing — runs a structured editorial panel for researchers publishing outside journals, and publishes on CiteStamp rails. Submission is free and goes through ORCID: icsacinstitute.org/submit.