Abstract
The term “non-citation factor” refers to the percentage of never-cited papers in a citation time window, a common phenomenon in the science world. Some scholars have qualitatively explored the reasons for not citing a publication, and quantitatively analyzed the mathematical functional relations between the “non-citation factor” and “impact factor of a journal.” This study simultaneously considers the mutual relations and closeness degree between the “non-citation factor” and different influencing factors from a novel perspective—that of using a more structuralized panel data model. The analysis revealed that the determinants, including “impact factor of journal,” “age of journal,” “average number of references per paper in journal,” and “issues of journal,” exerted an extremely small but positive influence (< 0.025) on the decline of “percentage of never-cited papers in the citation time window of publication year or 3 years.” That means the improvement of these determinants can decrease the percentage of never-cited papers. The “impact factor of the journal” always had the biggest positive influence, while the “average number of references per paper in journal” always had the smallest positive influence. In wider citation time windows of 3 or 6 years, two determinants—“number of publications in journal” and “amount of interdisciplinarity in journal”—began to exert a negative effect with a positive correlation coefficient on the decline of the “non-citation factor.” That means the improvement of these two determinants cannot decrease the value of the “non-citation factor,” even though they can increase its value. It is worth noting that the “impact factor of the journal” had a positive influence on the decline of the percentages of never-cited papers in the citation time window of publication year or 3 years, and began to play a negative role in the decline of percentage of never-cited papers in the citation time window of 6 years. Finally, three variables—“average number of authors per paper in journal,” “average number of references per paper in journal,” and “issues of journal”—no longer exerted an influence on the decline of percentages of never-cited papers in the citation time window of 6 years, while “age of journal” and “average number of pages per paper in journal” still made a positive contribution. Our findings could help research institutions, researchers, editors, and publishers understand the positively or negatively influential factors that lead to non-citation, thus improving the chance of papers being cited and having some academic influence.

Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anselin, L., Le Gallo, J., & Jayet, H. (2008). Spatial panel econometrics. In L. Mátyás & P. Sevestre (Eds.), The econometrics of panel data (pp. 625–660). Berlin: Springer.
Baltagi, B. H., & Maasoumi, E. (2013). An overview of dependence in cross-section, time-series, and panel data. Econometric Reviews, 32(5–6), 543–546.
Burrell, Q. L. (2002). Will this paper ever be cited? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(3), 232–235.
Burrell, Q. L. (2013). A stochastic approach to the relation between the impact factor and the uncitedness factor. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 676–682.
Egghe, L. (2008). The mathematical relation between the impact factor and the uncitedness factor. Scientometrics, 76(1), 118–123.
Egghe, L. (2010). The distribution of the uncitedness factor and its functional relation with the impact factor. Scientometrics, 83(3), 689–695.
Egghe, L. (2013). The functional relation between the impact factor and the uncitedness factor revisited. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 183–189.
Egghe, L., Guns, R., & Rousseau, R. (2011). Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and fields medalists as case studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1637–1644.
Frondel, M., & Vance, C. (2010). Fixed, random, or something in between? A variant of Hausman’s specification test for panel data estimators. Economics Letters, 107(3), 327–329.
Garfield, E. (1972). Uncitedness and identification of dissertation topics. Current Contents, (4),12.
Garfield, E. (1973). UncitednessIII—Importance of not being cited. Current Contents, 16(8), 5–6.
Garfield, E. (1991). To be an uncited scientist is no cause for shame. The Scientist, 5(6), 12.
Garfield, E. (1998). I had a dream… about uncitedness. The Scientist, 12(14), 10.
Ghosh, J. S. (1975). Uncitedness of articles in nature, a multidisciplinary scientific journal. Information Processing and Management, 11(5–7), 165–169.
Ghosh, J. S., & Neufeld, M. L. (1974). Uncitedness of articles in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Information Storage and Retrieval, 10(11–12), 365–369.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? a critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2), 199–214.
Greene, W. (2000). Econometric analysis (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Hamilton, D. P. (1990). Publishing by—and for?—The numbers. Science, 250, 1331–1332.
Hamilton, D. P. (1991). Research papers: Who’s uncited now? Science, 251, 25.
Hsu, J. W., & Huang, D. W. (2012). A scaling between impact factor and uncitedness. Physica A—Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 391(5), 2129–2134.
Hu, Z. W., & Wu, Y. S. (2014). Regularity in the time-dependent distribution of the percentage of never-cited papers: An empirical pilot study based on the six journals. Journal of Informetrics, 8(01), 136–146.
Hu, Z. W., & Wu, Y. S. (2017). A probe into causes of non-citation based on survey data. Social Science Information, 57(01), 139–151.
Kousha, K., & Abdoli, M. (2013). The citation impact of open access agricultural research. Online Information Review, 34(5), 772–785.
Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20(1), 28–32.
Lewison, G., & Dawson, G. (1998). The effect of funding on the outputs of biomedical research. Scientometrics, 41(1–2), 17–27.
Li, J., & Ye, F. Y. (2014). A probe into the citation patterns of high-quality and high-impact publications. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 19(2), 17–33.
Liang, L. M., Zhong, Z., & Rousseau, R. (2015). Uncited papers, uncited authors and uncited topics: A case study in library and information science. Journal of Informetrics, 9, 50–58.
MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (2010). Problems of citation analysis: A study of uncited and seldom-cited influences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 1–12.
Morton, L. P., & Lin, L. Y. (1995). Content and citation analyses of public relations review. Public Relations Review, 21(4), 337–349.
Pendlebury, D. A. (1991). Science, citation, and funding. Science, 251, 1410–1411.
Peters, H. P. F., & Raan, A. F. J. V. (1994). On determinants of citation scores: A case study in chemical engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 39–49.
Price, D. J. D. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 145, 510–515.
Racki, G. (2009). Rank-normalized journal impact factor as a predictive tool. Archivum immunologiae et therapiae experimentalis, 57(1), 39–43.
Rousseau, R. (1992). Why am I not cited, or why are multi-authored papers more cited than others. Journal of Documentation., 48(1), 79–80.
Sarafidis, V., & Wansbeek, T. (2012). Cross-sectional dependence in panel data analysis. Econometric Reviews, 31(5), 483–531.
Sengupta, I. N., & Henzler, R. G. (1991). Citedness and uncitedness of cancer articles. Scientometrics, 22(2), 283–296.
Stern, R. E. (1990). Uncitedness in the biomedical literature. Journal of the American society for information science, 41, 193–196.
Sykes, A. O. (1993). An introduction to regression analysis. American Statistician, 61(2), 101.
Thelwall, M. (2016). Are there too many uncited articles? Zero inflated variants of the discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 622–633.
Thomson, S. R., & Clarke, D. L. (1997). Uncited prince. South African Journal of Surgery, 35(4), 229.
Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Moed, H. F. (2005). Characteristics of journal impact factors: The effects of uncitedness and citation distribution on the understanding of journal impact factors. Scientometrics, 63(2), 357–371.
Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results. Scientometrics, 42(3), 423–428.
Williams, R. (2015). Review of multiple regression. Retrieved from http://www.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats2/l02.pdf. Accessed 6 July 2017.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2016). A comparative study of the citation impact of Chinese journals with government priority support. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, Retrieved from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/frma.2016.00003/full. Accessed 18 July 2017.
Acknowledgements
This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71373252 and 71603128), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province of China (Grant No. BK20160974), the Humanity and Social Science Youth Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (Grant No. 15YJC870011), Top-notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hu, Z., Wu, Y. & Sun, J. A quantitative analysis of determinants of non-citation using a panel data model. Scientometrics 116, 843–861 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2791-x
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2791-x