| Abstract: |
The prevalence of faulty citations impedes the growth of scientific knowledge.
Faulty citations include omissions of relevant papers, incorrect references,
and quotation errors that misreport findings. We discuss key studies in these
areas. We then examine citations to Estimating nonresponse bias in mail
surveys, one of the most frequently cited papers from the Journal of Marketing
Research, as an exploratory study to illustrate these issues. This paper is
especially useful in testing for quotation errors because it provides specific
operational recommendations on adjusting for nonresponse bias; therefore, it
allows us to determine whether the citing papers properly used the findings.
By any number of measures, those doing survey research fail to cite this paper
and, presumably, make inadequate adjustments for nonresponse bias.
Furthermore, even when the paper was cited, 49 of the 50 studies that we
examined reported its findings improperly. The inappropriate use of
statistical-significance testing led researchers to conclude that nonresponse
bias was not present in 76 percent of the studies in our sample. Only one of
the studies in the sample made any adjustment for it. Judging from the
original paper, we estimate that the study researchers should have predicted
nonresponse bias and adjusted for 148 variables. In this case, the faulty
citations seem to have arisen either because the authors did not read the
original paper or because they did not fully understand its implications. To
address the problem of omissions, we recommend that journals include a section
on their websites to list all relevant papers that have been overlooked and
show how the omitted paper relates to the published paper. In general, authors
should routinely verify the accuracy of their sources by reading the cited
papers. For substantive findings, they should attempt to contact the authors
for confirmation or clarification of the results and methods. This would also
provide them with the opportunity to enquire about other relevant references.
Journal editors should require that authors sign statements that they have
read the cited papers and, when appropriate, have attempted to verify the
citations. |