IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v10y2017i04p610-616_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citation Counts and More Citation Counts: Useful? Interesting? or Counterproductive?

Author

Listed:
  • Campbell, John P.

Abstract

In their focal article, Aguinis et al. (2017) categorized the 6,654 unique citations, summed across the six introductory industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology texts, in various ways. They then suggested how such data could be used to (a) infer the “state†of the scientist–practitioner divide; (b) document the extent of the movement of I-O psychologists to management schools; (c) evaluate the future prospects of I-O psychology as a field; and (d) provide guidance in how to define, measure, and reward “scholarly impact†(quotation marks added). This crosses the line from interesting to very counterproductive.

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell, John P., 2017. "Citation Counts and More Citation Counts: Useful? Interesting? or Counterproductive?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 610-616, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:04:p:610-616_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942617000657/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:04:p:610-616_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.