Prediction of citation accrual from editorialhighlights

Citations and reputations take years to build, but it is sometimes necessary to look for early signs of promise in a scientist’s work. Editorial highlights, which are editor-curated lists of select papers, may prove valuable as early predictors of citations. In a proof-of-concept study [1,2], we observed that highlighting identifies a citation advantage that is stratified according to the degree of vetting for importance during peer review. Here, we comprehensively study the citation accrual associated with various highlighting platforms, such as Research Highlights in Nature and other NPG journals, Editors’ Choice in Science, Optica Spotlight on Optics, ACS Editors’ Choice, Synopses and Viewpoints in Physics, Editors’ Suggestions in APS journals, etc. We quantify the citation advantage for each highlighting platform and discuss robustness and reliability issues. 

[1] Antonoyiannakis M. (2021) Does Publicity in the Science Press Drive Citations? A Vindication of Peer Review. In: Manolopoulos Y., Vergoulis T. (eds) Predicting the Dynamics of Research Impact. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86668-6_4

[2] See also Chawla, D. S. “Promoted Physics Studies Are Cited More”, Physics Today (2021), https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.1.20210611a/full/