<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Nature Network - citation</title>
    <description>The latest taggings for citation</description>
    <link>http://network.nature.com/announcements</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Refereeing, self-promotion and other temptations</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Brian Derby - I have been getting rid of my backlog of papers that I have to referee as an end of summer desk clearing exercise. Normally you are given papers to referee that are related to work you have done in the]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Article downloads and citations of open access papers</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - The _British Medical Journal_ this week published "Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial":http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/337/jul31_1/a568 by Phlip Davis et al. There are already "several publications":http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0040157 that looked at the full paper downloads and citations of open access papers]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Reference Journal Management</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Casey Chan - Has anyone tried using "WizFolio Web 2.0":http://www.wizfolio.com journal reference management software? Appreciate if you will share your experience.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Have you ever been miscited?</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Sarah Kemmitt - We all know how important citation is for our scientific careers, not to mention the principle and etiquette of acknowledging the innovations of others. If we are miscited this can have important repercussions. It would be really interesting to find]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Do online journals narrow science and scholarship? </title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - James Evans, a sociologist from the Universiry of Chicago, "reports":http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1150473 his research on the kind and frequency of citations over the last 60 years in the lastest issue of _Science_. He found a change in citation behavior as more and]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2007 Impact Factors in context</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Maxine Clarke - Various publishers have been putting out press releases to celebrate their new (2007) Impact Factors, each with their own spin on the numbers awarded by Thomson Reuters (the new name for Thomson ISI) to their journals. "Outsell Insights":http://www.outsellinc.com, a market]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Activity of authors of Nature Precedings articles</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Santosh Patnaik - How productive (active) are the authors who have published manuscripts in _Nature Precedings_? Here's an analysis done by counting the number of abstracts returned in PubMed searches using authors' "full names":http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=helppubmed.section.pubmedhelp.Searching_PubMed#pubmedhelp.Searching_by_author. The result indicates that well-published authors are publishing in]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Better metrics for an individual's "value"</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Maxine Clarke - The misuse of Impact Factors is mainly in two areas. First, different disciplines have different publication rates and citation behaviour, leading to a host of errors and misunderstandings; and second, a journal's Impact Factor is sometimes (in some countries) applied]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Citation in science -- 12 June 2008</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Maxine Clarke - Does research need new measuring sticks? The Nature Network group "Citation in Science":http://network.nature.com/london/forum/citation-science hopes to find common ground among researchers, funders, information providers and others concerning the measures of research output. Allan Sudlow of the British Library lists common ways]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Referencing. The do's and the dont's.</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Simon Hughes - On a wider topic of citation. When writing papers I always attempted to cite only those papers that: a) correctly, and in their entirety, support my own findings; b) point out the most relevant and useful studies to the reader;]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
