ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2021
Specialized terminology reduces the number of citations of scientific papers.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- (Re)Integrating classical natural history approaches into contemporary field primatology: toward a more holistic understanding of primates.Primates; journal of primatology · 2026Review
- CarD-T: an automated pipeline for the nomination and analysis of potential human carcinogens.Carcinogenesis · 2025Article
- A Practical Guide to Translating Scientific Publications Into Aphasia-Friendly Summaries.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2025Article
- Fundamental questions in meiofauna research highlight how small but ubiquitous animals can improve our understanding of Nature.Communications biology · 2025Article
- The Sixth Mass Extinction and Amphibian Species Sustainability Through Reproduction and Advanced Biotechnologies, Biobanking of Germplasm and Somatic Cells, and Conservation Breeding Programs (RBCs).Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Competency in invasion science: addressing stagnation challenges by promoting innovation and creative thinking.Environmental management · 2024Article
- Personalized Jargon Identification for Enhanced Interdisciplinary Communication.Proceedings of the conference. Association for Computational Linguistics. North American Chapter. Meeting · 2024Article
- Article
- Ecological Civilisation and Amphibian Sustainability through Reproduction Biotechnologies, Biobanking, and Conservation Breeding Programs (RBCs).Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Perspectives and pitfalls in preserving subterranean biodiversity through protected areas.npj biodiversity · 2024Review
- Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation.Science communication · 2023Article
- Availability of web servers significantly boosts citations rates of bioinformatics methods for protein function and disorder prediction.Bioinformatics advances · 2023Article
- Natural selection versus neutral mutation in the evolution of subterranean life: A false dichotomy?Frontiers in ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- A trait database and updated checklist for European subterranean spiders.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Specialized terminology reduces the number of citations of scientific papers.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Words are the building blocks of communicating science. As our understanding of the world progresses, scientific disciplines naturally enrich their specialized vocabulary (jargon). However, in the era of interdisciplinarity, the use of jargon may hinder effective communication among scientists that do not share a common scientific background. The question of how jargon limits the transmission of scientific knowledge has long been debated but rarely addressed quantitatively. We explored the relationship between the use of jargon and citations, using 21 486 articles focusing on cave research, a multidisciplinary field particularly prone to terminological specialization, and where linguistic disagreement among peers is frequent. We demonstrate a significant negative relationship between the proportion of jargon words in the title and abstract and the number of citations a paper receives. Given that these elements are the hook to readers, we urge scientists to restrict jargon to sections of the paper where its use is unavoidable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.