Citation bias in comparative psychology: the example of physical cognition literature

Abstract

Citation bias refers primarily to the likelihood of citing positive and clear empirical results and claims being higher than that of citing negative and ambiguous results and claims. This type of bias has been reported for various literatures, although some indicators exist that different disciplines differ in the extent to which they are affected by such a citation bias. The majority of work on citation bias involves whole literatures within a disciplines, however a narrower focus on specific research areas is important for areas that are small and have no culture of systematic reviews and meta-analysis that could work against citation biases negatively affecting knowledge production. The aim of this study was to test whether a citation bias exists within the physical cognition literature in comparative cognition/comparative psychology research. Testing citation bias was based on earlier categorisation of study claims ('positive', 'negative', and 'ambiguous') and the journal impact factor (JIF). The results of a mediation analysis show that there is no clear effect of the categorisation of main claims on the citation rate nor a clear role of the journal impact factor as a mediator. These findings suggest that the comparative cognition literature investigating physical cognition in animals is not affected by a clear citation bias.