Timeline for Why do journals have limits on the number of references?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2015 at 1:22 | history | edited | dionys | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 62 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2015 at 13:57 | history | edited | yo' | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Jun 25, 2015 at 10:59 | history | edited | dionys | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1266 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2015 at 8:54 | comment | added | Willie Wong | @CGCampbell: in any case, the point of my question is something somewhat different. | |
| Jun 25, 2015 at 8:53 | comment | added | Willie Wong | @CGCampbell: guidance I agree with, but wording is important. It would be nice if instead just stating matter-of-factly that there is a reference limit, the instruction reads something like: "Please only include scientifically necessary references, typical research articles in this journal have between 10 and 40 citations, while typical letters have between 2 and 25." With the implication that if you are an "outlier", we will scrutinize it; and even if you are within the norm, you don't get carte blanche to fill up the reference section with crap. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 17:12 | comment | added | CGCampbell | @WillieWong Putting the onus on the referees to 'enforce a limit of references' is corralling cats after they've walked out the door. Setting out guidelines that (upon justified request can be excepted) guide the product before submission, seems a better way to manage the system. I'm not saying I agree with limits on references, but if there are going to be limits, guidance should be before submission and not after. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 13:04 | comment | added | Willie Wong | +1 however for your last paragraph, even though I think that there are better ways to achieve the same goal. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 12:55 | comment | added | dionys | @WillieWong : I certainly agree that referees and the editor should determine what should be included, but that doesn't preclude the application of some guidelines for the general form of an article. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 12:52 | comment | added | Willie Wong | And whether references are "essential and useful" should be delegated to the referees, and not decided by a computer based on an arbitrary number. Indeed, if the intent is for the quality of the articles, such concerns about the references being "essential" can be both included in the instructions to the authors and the referees in lieu of a numeric count. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 12:51 | comment | added | Willie Wong | Plenty of journals makes space recommendations without explicit mention of the number of references. For length considerations a simple "total word count" with references included can suffice. | |
| Jun 24, 2015 at 12:50 | history | edited | dionys | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 654 characters in body
|
| Jun 24, 2015 at 12:43 | history | answered | dionys | CC BY-SA 3.0 |