Cargando…

COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain

Presented study explores the knowledge domain of psychological research published in 2020 and 2021. Metadata from 156,942 psychology papers available in Scopus were analyzed using citation analysis and bibliographic mapping techniques. Having in mind the ubiquity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the num...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Pajić, Dejan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9117083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35607645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3
_version_ 1784710253055574016
author Pajić, Dejan
author_facet Pajić, Dejan
author_sort Pajić, Dejan
collection PubMed
description Presented study explores the knowledge domain of psychological research published in 2020 and 2021. Metadata from 156,942 psychology papers available in Scopus were analyzed using citation analysis and bibliographic mapping techniques. Having in mind the ubiquity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the numerous ways it has affected people’s lives, the fact that COVID-19-related papers represent only 2% to 7% of the total academic production in psychology may seem rather low. However, these papers have attracted much more attention from the public than non-COVID papers. They were also cited two to eight times more frequently, depending on the measure used, and account for 16% to 19% of total citations to psychology papers. Results show that early-stage researchers and those who had fewer articles in Scopus have benefited more from publishing COVID papers. They have managed to boost their average citation rates to the level of their colleagues who were much longer active and previously had higher citedness. Results indicate that the authors citing behavior largely follows the cumulative advantage pattern. Psychological research in general is mainly focused on mental health, anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is even more fostered due to the pandemic since some of these topics are often analyzed as typical emotional reactions to COVID-19. Other relevant issues are also very well covered, except for the question how scientific results are communicated to the public. The role of “hot” papers was elaborated from the perspective of research evaluation practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9117083
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91170832022-05-19 COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain Pajić, Dejan Curr Psychol Article Presented study explores the knowledge domain of psychological research published in 2020 and 2021. Metadata from 156,942 psychology papers available in Scopus were analyzed using citation analysis and bibliographic mapping techniques. Having in mind the ubiquity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the numerous ways it has affected people’s lives, the fact that COVID-19-related papers represent only 2% to 7% of the total academic production in psychology may seem rather low. However, these papers have attracted much more attention from the public than non-COVID papers. They were also cited two to eight times more frequently, depending on the measure used, and account for 16% to 19% of total citations to psychology papers. Results show that early-stage researchers and those who had fewer articles in Scopus have benefited more from publishing COVID papers. They have managed to boost their average citation rates to the level of their colleagues who were much longer active and previously had higher citedness. Results indicate that the authors citing behavior largely follows the cumulative advantage pattern. Psychological research in general is mainly focused on mental health, anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is even more fostered due to the pandemic since some of these topics are often analyzed as typical emotional reactions to COVID-19. Other relevant issues are also very well covered, except for the question how scientific results are communicated to the public. The role of “hot” papers was elaborated from the perspective of research evaluation practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3. Springer US 2022-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9117083/ /pubmed/35607645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Article
Pajić, Dejan
COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title_full COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title_fullStr COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title_full_unstemmed COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title_short COVID-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
title_sort covid-19 citation pandemic within the psychological knowledge domain
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9117083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35607645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03146-3
work_keys_str_mv AT pajicdejan covid19citationpandemicwithinthepsychologicalknowledgedomain