Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

How are encyclopedias cited in academic research? Wikipedia, Britannica, Baidu Baike, and Scholarpedia

Bibliographic Data

ID12623915
AuthorsXuemei Li (0000-0002-3500-5624, York University Libraries, corresponding author), Mike Thelwall (0000-0001-6065-205X, University of Wolverhampton), Ehsan Mohammadi (0000-0003-3481-6991, University of South Carolina)
Year2021
Publication date2021-09-09
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEl Profesional de la Informacion (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1386-6710 • E-ISSN: 1699-2407
PublisherEdiciones Profesionales de la Informacion SL (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.3145/epi.2021.sep.08
OpenAlexW3198631874
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited23

Encyclopedias are sometimes cited by scholarly publications, despite concerns about their credibility as sources for academic information. This study investigates trends from 2002 to 2020 in citing two crowdsourced and two expert-based encyclopedias to investigate whether they fit differently into the research landscape: Wikipedia, Britannica, Baidu Baike, and Scholarpedia. This is the first systematic comparison of the uptake of four major encyclopedias within academic research. Scopus searches were used to count the number of documents citing the four encyclopedias in each year. Wikipedia was by far the most cited encyclopedia, with up to 1% of Scopus documents citing it in Computer Science. Citations to Wikipedia increased exponentially until 2010, then slowed down and started to decrease. Both the Britannica and Scholarpedia citation rates were increasing in 2020, however. Disciplinary and national differences include Britannica being popular in Arts and Humanities, Scholarpedia in Neuroscience, and Baidu Baike in Chinese-speaking countries/territories. The results confirm that encyclopedias have minor value for academic research, often for background and definitions, with the most suitable one varying between fields and countries, and with the first evidence that the popularity of crowdsourced encyclopedias may be waning

Bibliometrics · Citation · Citation analysis · Credibility · Discipline · Encyclopedia · Library science · Political science · Popularity · Scopus · Social science · Sociology · World Wide Web · Computer Science · History · Law · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Web and Library Services · Wikis in Education and Collaboration

  • Visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools through citation analysis

    Open Access•Robert Tomaszewski•Scientometrics•2023

  • Wikinformetrics

    Open Access•Wenceslao Arroyo‐Machado, Daniel Torres‐Salinas et al.•Quantitative Science Studies•2022

  • Internet encyclopaedias go head to head

    Open Access•Jim Giles•Nature•2005

  • Covid-19 research in Wikipedia

    Open Access•Giovanni Colavizza•Quantitative Science Studies•2020

  • An empirical examination of Wikipedia's credibility

    Open Access•Thomas Chesney•First Monday•2006

  • The visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly publications

    Open Access•Taemin Kim Park•First Monday•2011

  • Wikipedia versus Encyclopedia Britannica

    Marcus Messner, Marcia W Distaso•Mass Communication & Society•2013

Unique citing works2
Citations per year0,5
Citation span2022 - 2023 (2)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 2

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae