论文标题
对所有学术学科的引用和参考习惯的分析：书目参考和引用实践的方法和趋势
An analysis of citing and referencing habits across all scholarly disciplines: approaches and trends in bibliographic referencing and citing practices
论文作者
论文摘要
目的。在这项研究中，我们希望确定当前的可能原因引用和引用学术文献中的错误，以比较他在1989年的论文中是否从快照中提供了一些变化。设计/方法/方法。我们分析了参考元素，即参考元素，即参考文献，提及，引号和各自的文本参考指针，从27个主题领域的147篇期刊上发表的729篇文章。发现。我们的分析结果指出，书目错误已经持续了数十年，尽管有鼓励使用技术设施，即参考经理，但它们的可能原因有所增加。独创性。据我们所知，我们的研究是Sweetland（1989）以来文献中引用和引用文献中的错误的最新分析。
Purpose. In this study, we want to identify current possible causes for citing and referencing errors in scholarly literature to compare if something changed from the snapshot provided Sweetland in his 1989 paper. Design/methodology/approach. We analysed reference elements, i.e. bibliographic references, mentions, quotations, and respective in-text reference pointers, from 729 articles published in 147 journals across the 27 subject areas. Findings. The outcomes of our analysis pointed out that bibliographic errors have been perpetuated for decades and that their possible causes have increased, despite the encouraged use of technological facilities, i.e., the reference managers. Originality. As far as we know, our study is the best recent available analysis of errors in referencing and citing practices in the literature since Sweetland (1989).
