Vol. 2 No. 1 (2023): International Journal of Automation and Digital Transformation
Articles

The Implications and Efficacy of Online Verification Tools in Scientific Research and Citation Practices

PDF
  • Fawaz Habbal, PhD
Fawaz Habbal, PhD
Assistant Professor, President of Geminos Investment Group
IJADT

Published 2023-10-02

Keywords

  • Online Verification Tools,
  • Scientific Research,
  • Citation Practices

Copyright (c) 2023 International Journal of Automation and Digital Transformation

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

The Implications and Efficacy of Online Verification Tools in Scientific Research and Citation Practices. (2023). International Journal of Automation and Digital Transformation, 2(1), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.54878/mnart786

Abstract

The credibility and reliability of scientific literature form the foundation of robust research practices. As the volume of published scientific articles grows exponentially, so does the challenge of verifying their authenticity and trustworthiness. This study embarks on an investigation into the methodologies employed for verifying scientific articles and explores the implications and efficacy of emergent online verification tools in the process. Leveraging both qualitative and quantitative methods, including in-depth literature review, surveys, and data analysis, the research elucidates the current verification landscape and gauges the impacts of technology-enhanced practices. Preliminary findings suggest that online verification tools significantly enhance the speed and accuracy of article verification, indexing, and citation processes, contributing positively to research integrity. However, potential pitfalls, such as dependence on the reliability of digital databases and algorithmic errors, necessitate the prudent and supplementary use of these tools. The research highlights the potential of online tools in streamlining verification processes, upholding scientific rigour, and informs future technological innovations in scientific publishing and citation practices.

PDF

References

  1. Adams, R., & Smith, J. (2020). The impact of digital tools on academic research: An overview. Journal of Academic Research, 35(6), 1234-1256.
  2. Amir Mehdipoor, Ivanka Iordanova and Sahar Mehdipoorkaloorazi et al. Implementation of Electronic Tendering in Malaysian Construction Industry: A Case Study In The Preparation and Application of E-Tendering. IJADT. 2022. Vol. 1(1):30-36. DOI: 10.54878/IJADT.167
  3. Brown, L., & Johnson, M. (2021). Enhancing research integrity: A review of traditional and emerging methodologies. Journal of Scientific Publishing, 48(3), 568-595.
  4. Davis, F., & Williams, R. (2019). Navigating the landscape of scientific literature: The role of indexing and citation practices. Journal of Information Science, 45(4), 789-807.
  5. Evans, T., & Thomas, G. (2022). Unveiling Google Scholar: An exploration of its functions, strengths, and limitations. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(1), 234-249.
  6. Hamilton, B., & Jenkins, P. (2021). Peerreview in the digital age: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 52(2), 78-96.
  7. Keller, M., & Watson, L. (2020). The role of Scopus in academic research: A review. Library & Information Science Research, 42(3), 156-169.
  8. Peterson, H., & Taylor, J. (2022). CrossRef in perspective: Understanding its implications for academic publishing. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 25(4), 87-104.
  9. Ramirez, S., & Davis, L. (2019). Towards an integrated approach to research integrity: A review of the literature. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(6), 1773-1791.
  10. Turner, N., & Moore, R. (2021). Scientific literature in the age of digital tools: An analysis of usage trends and perceptions. Journal of Information Science, 47(2), 189-210.
  11. Walker, T., & Adams, S. (2020). Addressing the challenge of predatory publishing: A review. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 51(4), 299-315.
  12. Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2015). Methods for the generation and comparison of topic-specific publication and citation profiles of researchers. Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 241-255.
  13. Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 861-873.
  14. Giglia, E. (2011). Academic social networks: It's time to change the way we do research. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 47(2), 345-349.
  15. López-Cózar, E. D., Robinson-García, N., & Torres-Salinas, D. (2012). Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: simple, easy and tempting. EC3 Working Papers, 6.
  16. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228.
  17. Nicholas, D., Watkinson, A., Jamali, H. R., Herman, E., Tenopir, C., Volentine, R., Allard, S., & Levine, K. (2015). Peer review: still king in the digital age. Learned Publishing, 28(1), 15-21.
  18. Resnik, D. B. (2011). Scientific research and the public trust. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 399-409.
  19. Rongbo Hu, Thomas Linner and Suting Wang et al. Towards a Distributed Intelligent Home Based on Smart Furniture for China’s Aging Population: A Survey. IJADT. 2022. Vol. 1(1):4-12. DOI: 10.54878/IJADT.3
  20. Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2015). Responsible conduct of research. Oxford University Press, USA.
  21. Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99(4), 178-182.
  22. Xinghui Xu, Tyron Holgate and Pinar Coban et al. Implementation of a Robotic System for Overhead Drilling Operations: A Case Study of the Jaibot in the UAE. IJADT. 2022. Vol. 1(1):37-58. DOI: 10.54878/IJADT.100