Identifying and correcting invalid citations due to DOI errors in Crossref data

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage3593
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue6
dc.bibliographicCitation.lastPage3612
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume127
dc.contributor.authorCioffi, Alessia
dc.contributor.authorCoppini, Sara
dc.contributor.authorMassari, Arcangelo
dc.contributor.authorMoretti, Arianna
dc.contributor.authorPeroni, Silvio
dc.contributor.authorSantini, Cristian
dc.contributor.authorShahidzadeh Asadi, Nooshin
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-19T11:07:12Z
dc.date.available2022-09-19T11:07:12Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractThis work aims to identify classes of DOI mistakes by analysing the open bibliographic metadata available in Crossref, highlighting which publishers were responsible for such mistakes and how many of these incorrect DOIs could be corrected through automatic processes. By using a list of invalid cited DOIs gathered by OpenCitations while processing the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations (COCI) in the past two years, we retrieved the citations in the January 2021 Crossref dump to such invalid DOIs. We processed these citations by keeping track of their validity and the publishers responsible for uploading the related citation data in Crossref. Finally, we identified patterns of factual errors in the invalid DOIs and the regular expressions needed to catch and correct them. The outcomes of this research show that only a few publishers were responsible for and/or affected by the majority of invalid citations. We extended the taxonomy of DOI name errors proposed in past studies and defined more elaborated regular expressions that can clean a higher number of mistakes in invalid DOIs than prior approaches. The data gathered in our study can enable investigating possible reasons for DOI mistakes from a qualitative point of view, helping publishers identify the problems underlying their production of invalid citation data. Also, the DOI cleaning mechanism we present could be integrated into the existing process (e.g. in COCI) to add citations by automatically correcting a wrong DOI. This study was run strictly following Open Science principles, and, as such, our research outcomes are fully reproducible.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/10217
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34657/9252
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherDordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04367-w
dc.relation.essn1588-2861
dc.relation.ispartofseriesScientometrics : an international journal for all quantitative aspects of the science of science, communication in science and science policy 127 (2022), Nr. 6
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unported
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectInvalid citationseng
dc.subjectIncorrect DOIeng
dc.subjectOpen citationseng
dc.subjectCrossrefeng
dc.subjectOpenCitationseng
dc.subject.ddc370
dc.subject.ddc050
dc.titleIdentifying and correcting invalid citations due to DOI errors in Crossref dataeng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleScientometrics : an international journal for all quantitative aspects of the science of science, communication in science and science policy
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorFIZ KA
wgl.subjectErziehung, Schul- und Bildungswesenger
wgl.subjectInformatikger
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikelger
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Identifying_and_correcting_invalid_citations.pdf
Size:
1.5 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: