Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News
  • Published:

Science papers rarely cited in negative ways

Just 2.4% of citations from an immunology journal present disagreements with previous work.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Catalini, C., Lacetera, N. & Oettl, A. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502280112 (2015).

Download references

Authors

Additional information

Tweet Follow @NatureNews

Related links

Related links

Related links in Nature Research

‘Sleeping beauty’ papers slumber for decades 2015-May-25

Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics 2015-Apr-22

Bibliometrics: Is your most cited work your best? 2014-Oct-29

Rejection improves eventual impact of manuscripts 2012-Oct-11

Related external links

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ball, P. Science papers rarely cited in negative ways. Nature (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.18643

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.18643

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing