Journal of Business and Technical Communication Apr 2000

In Citing Chaos

Danette Paul Brigham Young University

Abstract

Research on citations has generally examined citations as part of a system of rewards or as a rhetorical tool for strengthening arguments. This study examines the role of citations both as reward and as rhetoric. The reward system was examined by tracing over time the citation patterns of 13 research articles by two groups of scientists in chaos theory. The rhetorical practices were examined by determining how these articles were cited, by reviewing 609 citations of the 13 research articles. The analysis revealed that scientists consistently used five rhetorical practices: (1) using citations in the introduction, (2) using authors' names in the citation, (3) using the citation in a statement that asserts a high level of certainty, (4) using citations to create a research space, and (5) combining the use of the authors' names with placement in the introduction. These features indicated the articles' centrality in scientific discourse.

Journal
Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Published
2000-04-01
DOI
10.1177/105065190001400202
Open Access
Closed
Topics
scientific writing

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Pruitt (2026)
    (Re)Considering Centrality: A Bibliometric Network Analysis of College Composit…
    College Composition and Communication
  2. Paul (2004)
    Spreading Chaos
    Written Communication

Cites in this index (2)

  1. SWALES et al. (1987)
    The Writing of Research Article Introductions
    Written Communication
  2. FAHNESTOCK (1986)
    Accommodating Science
    Written Communication
Also cites 13 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1007/BF02017064
     ↗
  2. 10.1177/007327537901700202
     ↗
  3. 10.1177/030631277700700112
     ↗
  4. 10.1126/science.1986409
     ↗
  5. 10.1080/10417949209372863
     ↗
  6. 10.1177/030631282012004003
     ↗
  7. 10.4324/9780203214589
     ↗
  8. 10.1175/1520-0469(1963)020<0130:DNF>2.0.CO;2
     ↗
  9. 10.1177/030631286016001008
     ↗
  10. 10.1007/BF02017729
     ↗
  11. 10.1177/030631277800800305
     ↗
  12. 10.1017/CBO9781139171434.005
     ↗
  13. 10.1007/BF02016675
     ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 20 View in citation network →

Related Articles

  1. Written Communication Mar 2026
    Metadiscoursal Superimposition as a Methodological Approach: Towards a Structured, Quantifiable, and Functionally Enriched Framework of Interactional Metadiscourse ↗
    Višnja Pavičić Takač; Vesna Bogdanović
    scientific writing multilingual writers
  2. Written Communication Jan 2026
    Notions About Drafts in Scientific Research Articles: A Case Study With Writers at Different Levels of Expertise ↗
    Paloma Domínguez Jeria; Mónica S. Cárdenas-Claros; Alejandra Figueroa-Leighton; Teresa Alonzo; Carola Alvarado Barra
    qualitative research scientific writing
  3. Technical Communication Quarterly Nov 2025
    “That’s What You’re Supposed to Do on Twitter”: Emotion, Affect, and Positivity in Online Climate Science Communication ↗
    Shelton Weech
    social media scientific writing affect and writing
  4. Written Communication Jul 2025
    Women Scientists’ Digitally Mediated Activity, Genres and Digital Tools: A Cross-sectional Survey Across the Disciplines ↗
    Carmen Pérez-Llantada; Oana Maria Carciu; Rosana Villares
    writing pedagogy writing across the curriculum quantitative research digital rhetoric professional writing scientific writing multilingual writers
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Apr 2025
    Synthetic Genres: Expert Genres, Non-Specialist Audiences, and Misinformation in the Artificial Intelligence Age ↗
    Brad Mehlenbacher; Ana Patricia Balbon; Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher
    genre theory multimodality artificial intelligence scientific writing multilingual writers