A data-driven comparative analysis on citation intents across scientific disciplines

The goal of this paper is to conduct a first comparative analysis on citation intents across multiple scientific disciplines. To this end, we conducted a data-driven investigation into the characteristics of citation intents utilizing a large-scale dataset of 17,717 academic papers and 2,345,674 citation contexts from 21 Web of Science subject categories. We analyzed five key characteristics: i) inter-category distribution of citation intents, ii) average number of citation intents per article, iii) age distribution of citation intents, iv) similarity of the age distributions of citation intent, and v) predictability of the number of citation intents. We found out that there are significant differences in all five characteristics across different research disciplines. Specifically, Philosophy, Sociology, Area, and History prioritize Background and Motivation intents while exhibiting minimal engagement with Uses and Extends. Conversely, Computer Science AI represents a unique case, characterized by a dominant prevalence of Uses and Extends intents alongside the least frequent use of background-oriented citations. Furthermore, the age distributions of citation intents exhibit the lowest similarity in Area, and History. In terms of predictability, Biotechnology and Plant Science exhibit the highest correlation levels in citation intent counts, whereas Sociology, Philosophy, and History yield the lowest correlation coefficients. Our comparative analysis not only uncovers cross-disciplinary variations and establishes a standardized framework for the comparative analysis of citation intents, but also has applications in advancing the normalization of scholarly indicators, facilitating trend detection, and supporting curriculum design for specific scientific disciplines.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358327
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

A data-driven comparative analysis on citation intents across scientific disciplines

Jason J. Jung, Tuan-Anh Phan, Seohyun Nam
PLoS ONE
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

A data-driven comparative analysis on citation intents across scientific disciplines

Jason J. Jung, Tuan-Anh Phan, Seohyun Nam
article en

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to conduct a first comparative analysis on citation intents across multiple scientific disciplines. To this end, we conducted a data-driven investigation into the characteristics of citation intents utilizing a large-scale dataset of 17,717 academic papers and 2,345,674 citation contexts from 21 Web of Science subject categories. We analyzed five key characteristics: i) inter-category distribution of citation intents, ii) average number of citation intents per article, iii) age distribution of citation intents, iv) similarity of the age distributions of citation intent, and v) predictability of the number of citation intents. We found out that there are significant differences in all five characteristics across different research disciplines. Specifically, Philosophy, Sociology, Area, and History prioritize Background and Motivation intents while exhibiting minimal engagement with Uses and Extends. Conversely, Computer Science AI represents a unique case, characterized by a dominant prevalence of Uses and Extends intents alongside the least frequent use of background-oriented citations. Furthermore, the age distributions of citation intents exhibit the lowest similarity in Area, and History. In terms of predictability, Biotechnology and Plant Science exhibit the highest correlation levels in citation intent counts, whereas Sociology, Philosophy, and History yield the lowest correlation coefficients. Our comparative analysis not only uncovers cross-disciplinary variations and establishes a standardized framework for the comparative analysis of citation intents, but also has applications in advancing the normalization of scholarly indicators, facilitating trend detection, and supporting curriculum design for specific scientific disciplines.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(9)
Chung-Ang University (KR)
Chung-Ang University
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A data-driven comparative analysis on citation intents across scientific disciplines — Jason J. Jung, Tuan-Anh Phan, et al. · PLoS ONE (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS