Many psychological tests have the so-called \u201clie-scale.\u201d\u009d A small but sufficient number of questions that admit only one true answer, such as: \u201cDo you always reply to letters immediately after reading them?\u201d\u009d are
\ninserted among others that are central to the particular test. A wrong reply for such a question adds a point on the lie-scale, and when the lie-score is high, the over-all test results are discarded as unreliable. Perhaps, for a scientist the best candidate for such a lie-scale is the question: \u201cDo you read all of the papers that you cite?\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
Comparative studies of the popularity of scientific papers has been a subject of much recent interest [1\u201d\u201c8], but the scope has been limited to citation distribution analysis. We have discovered a method of estimating
\nwhat percentage of people who cited the paper had actually read<\/b> it.<\/p>\n
The title of the paper is “Read Before You Cite!” No fair clicking the link until you have guessed, then check out their argument<\/a>–KSH<\/i>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Many psychological tests have the so-called \u201clie-scale.\u201d\u009d A small but sufficient number of questions that admit only one true answer, such as: \u201cDo you always reply to letters immediately after reading them?\u201d\u009d are inserted among others that are central to…<\/span><\/p>\n