Michelle Dawson posts

Post published on Bluesky on 4 Sep 2025 11:20

Bluesky DOI work crossref Extract quoted in the post External link integrated into the post

On problematic citing--e.g. intentionally omitting citations that would "raise concerns about the validity of one’s work" & "reduce the apparent novelty of one’s own work"--and "intentionally misrepresenting prior articles in citations" journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/... autism-relevant, free

View on Bluesky

Structured cited links

1 cited resource

DOI work Fetched Post crossref

Katherine M. Lawson, Brett A. Murphy, Jovani Azpeitia, Ella J. Lombard, Terrènce J. Pope (2025). Citing Decisions in Psychology: A Roadblock to Cumulative and Inclusive Science. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 8(3), 25152459251351287. SAGE Publications.

Publication date
3 Sep 2025
Identifier
10.1177/25152459251351287
Authors
Katherine M. Lawson, Brett A. Murphy, Jovani Azpeitia, Ella J. Lombard, Terrènce J. Pope
Source
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
Details
8(3), 25152459251351287
Reference type
article
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Metadata source
crossref

Abstract

Citations are the main avenue through which scholarly contributions are recognized. However, decisions about what to cite (or not cite) are often made without much systematic thought. Suboptimal citing practices undermine psychological science. Yet psychological science as a field has yet to comprehensively discuss ways to improve authors’ citing decisions. We outline the importance of citing for promoting the cumulativeness of the scientific endeavor, which encompasses promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the field. We describe how psychologists make citing decisions and some negative consequences when citation decisions are negligent (or even fraudulent). Moreover, we describe how citations driven by insular professional networks can reinforce historical exclusion and result in reference sections that reflect a failure to meaningfully search and engage with existing literature. Then, we review some potential causes of problematic citing behaviors, which include factors that manifest at the level of the individual, such as a desire to elevate one’s own professional profile, and systemic factors, such as the exponential growth in published literature. Finally, we offer strategies for the field, journals, labs, and individuals to improve citations. In framing our arguments and recommendations, we refer to empirical data collected on citing decisions from editorial-board members (N = 213) at 23 psychology journals.

Study authors in this cited reference