|| JaiSriGurudev||

Sri Adichunchanagiri ShikshanaTrust(R)

SJB INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

BGS Health & Education City, Dr. Vishnuvardhan Road, Kengeri, Bengaluru–560060
Bengaluru
An Autonomous Institute under Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi
Affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi & Approved by AICTE, New Delhi
Delhi,, Certified by ISO9001-2015
ISO9001
Accreditedby NBA &NAAC,NewDelhi
NAAC,NewDelhi with‘A
with‘A+’Grade,RecognizedbyUGC,NewDelhiwith2(f)and12(B)
,NewDelhiwith2(f)and12(B)

Notes
Course Name: Research Methodology & IPR
Course Code: 23RMAE61
Module –2

By

Faculty Name: Mrs. Prarthana J V

Semester: 6B

Department of Information Science & Engineering

Aca. Year: EVEN SEM /2025-26

 Module 2

Unit 1
Literature Review and Technical Reading
New and Existing Knowledge
Analysis and Synthesis of Prior Art
Bibliographic Databases
Web of Science
Google and Google Scholar
Effective Search:
The Way Forward Introduction to Technical Reading Conceptualizing Research, Critical and
Creative Reading
Taking Notes While Reading
Reading Mathematics and Algorithms
Reading a Datasheet
Unit 2
Attributions and Citations:
Giving Credit Wherever Due
Citations: Functions and Attributes
Impact of Title and Keywords on Citations
Knowledge Flow through Citation
Citing Datasets
Styles for Citations
Acknowledgments and Attributions
What Should Be Acknowledged
Acknowledgments in, Books Dissertations
Dedication or Acknowledgment
Chapter 1
Literature Review and Technical Reading
The primary goal of literature review is to know the use of content/ideas/approaches in the
literature to correctly identify the problem that is vaguely known beforehand, to advocate a specific
approach adopted to understanding the problem, and to access the choice of methods used. It also
helps the researcher understand clearly that the research to be undertaken would contribute
something new and innovative. The quality of such review can be determined by evaluating if it
includes appropriate breadth and depth of the area under study, clarity, rigor, consistency, effective
analysis.
2.1 New and Existing Knowledge
New knowledge in research can only be interpreted within the context of what is already known,
and cannot exist without the foundation of existing knowledge. In this chapter, we are going to
look at how that foundation of knowledge needs to be constructed so that our new knowledge is
supported by it. The new knowledge can have vastly different interpretations depending on what
the researcher’s background, and one’s perception of that new knowledge can change from
indifference to excitement (or vice versa), depending on what else one knows. The significance
can normally be argued from the point of view that there is indeed an existing problem and that it
is known by looking at what already exists in the field. The existing knowledge is needed to make
the case that there is a problem and that it is important. One can infer that the knowledge that is
sought to be produced does not yet exist by describing what other knowledge already exists and
by pointing out that this part is missing so that what we have is original. To do this, one again
needs the existing knowledge: the context, the significance, the originality, and the tools. Where
does this existing knowledge come from? Normally, one finds this knowledge by reading and
surveying the literature in the field that was established long ago and also about the more recent
knowledge which is in fact always changing. With this foundation in place, the new knowledge
that one will make will be much more difficult to challenge than without that strong foundation in
place which is ensured with lots of references to the literature. Often, but not always, the textbooks
contain the older established knowledge and the research papers the newer work. Reading the
textbooks on one’s topic provide the established knowledge and the background to be able to read
the newer work usually recorded in the research papers. Very often, reading a textbook is not too
difficult for it is written as a teaching instrument, and the author of the textbook normally starts
from the basics and take the reader, through everything that one needs to be able to understand that
topic. This is not at all the case with a research paper where the goal is normally to present a small
piece of new knowledge, and that new knowledge will not have stood the test of time in the same
way as the knowledge in a textbook would have. The research paper is written for other researchers
out on the edge of knowledge and it assumes that the reader already knows a lot in that field. A
researcher may find oneself continually going back to other sources to try and interpret what is
going on in a particular research paper. It can be difficult to find the right work to read, but the
objective with all this reading and learning is to be able to get the knowledge that one needs to
build the foundation. The review process must explain how a research item builds on another one
. This is because useful research should elucidate how and why certain technical development took
place, so that it is easy for the reader to comprehend why the present talk is being undertaken, and
a good literature survey would provide a convincing under to that question. An effective review of
literature ensures a firm foundation for advancing knowledge, facilitates theoretical growth,
eliminates as areas that might be of interest, and opens new avenues of possible work. An efficient
literature review is centered around concepts and not authors. Generally, a good literature survey
is the first expectation of a supervisor from the research student, and when done well can create a
good impression that the state of art in the chosen field is well understood. Simple rules for writing
an effective literature review are important for a research scholar, are provided. A good literature
review would not draw hasty conclusions and look into the individual references to determine the
underlying causes/assumptions/mechanisms in each of them so as to synthesize the available
information in a much more meaningful way. A literature review should be able to summarize as
to what is already known from the state of the art, detail the key concepts and the main factors or
parameters and the underlying relationships between those, describe any complementary existing
approaches, enumerate the inconsistencies or shortcomings in the published work, identify the
reported results that are inconclusive or contradictory, and provide a compulsive reason to do
further work in the field.
A good literature survey is typically a two-step process as enumerated below:
(i) Identify the major topics or subtopics or concepts relevant to the subject under
consideration.
(ii) Place the citation of the relevant source (article/patent/website/data, etc.) in the correct
category of the concept/topic/subtopic (with the help of a _, for example). It could be that as one
is reading and comes across something that one considers to be very important for one’s work, a
core principle or a description of something that just sounds really good, and one is excited to have
found it. Naturally, one highlights that section or underlines it, or put an asterisk in the margin, so
that one could come back to it later. Effectively, one is saying that it is important and hence the
marking so as not to forget it.
After having marked or highlighted the section, it is suggested that the paper be put away or the
book be closed. Then one should write about the highlighted part without copying it. As one writes
about why one thinks that part is important and what it contains, one is automatically changing it
and making it fit into one’s foundation in the way that makes sense. There are shaping and crafting
of that piece of knowledge to fit where one needs it to be. To build the knowledge foundation, one
needs to be reading and learning continually. But that is not enough, one also needs to be writing
about what one has read.
A comprehensive literature survey should methodically analyze and synthesize quality archived
work, provide a firm foundation to a topic of interest and the choice of suitable research
methodologies, and demonstrate that the proposed work would make a novel contribution to the
overall field of research.
2.2 Analysis and Synthesis of Prior Art
After collecting the sources, usually articles, intended to be used in the literature review, the
researcher is ready to break down each article and identify the useful content in it, and then
synthesize the collection of articles (integrate them and identify the conclusions that can be made
from the articles as a group) . A literature survey grid of N topics and M sources is shown below
to help crystallize the information in different categories.
A researcher should analyze the relevant information ascertained in Table 2.1 by undertaking the
following steps:
(i) Understanding the hypothesis,
(ii) Understanding the models and the experimental conditions used,
(iii) Making connections,
(iv) Comparing and contrasting the various information, and
(v) Finding out the strong points and the loopholes.
It is always good to be suspicious of the claims made in the sources that have been thoroughly
reviewed, especially in the case of tall claims. If one is amenable to easily accept whatever is
available in the literature, one may find it difficult to go

beyond it in one’s own work and may also fail to carefully analyze with a suspicious bent of mind
one’s own results subsequently.
The goal of literature survey is to bring out something new to work on through the identification
of unsolved issues, determine the problems in the existing models or experimental designs, and
present a novel idea and recommendations. No matter where one gets the available information,
one needs to critically evaluate each resource that the researcher wishes to cite. This methodology
analyzes available materials to determine suitability for the intended research. Relying on refereed
articles published in scholarly journals or granted patents can save the researcher a lot of time.
Here are a few criteria that could help the researcher in the evaluation of the information under
study:
• Authority: What are the author’s credentials and affiliation? Who publishes the information?
• Accuracy: Based on what one already knows about the topic or from reading other sources, does
the information seem credible? Does the author cite other sources in a reference list or
bibliography, to support the information presented?
• Scope: Is the source at an appropriate comprehension or research level?
There are other criteria to consider as well, such as currency, objectivity, and purpose. It is
important to ensure that the search question is neither too narrow nor too broad.
2.3 Bibliographic Databases
“Bibliographic databases” refer to “abstracting and indexing services” useful for collecting
citation-related information and possibly abstracts of research articles from scholarly literature and
making them available through search.
Performing simultaneous searches through such large databases may allow researchers to overtly
rely on any one database and be limited by the intrinsic shortcoming of any one of them for quality
research.
A researcher should be able to quickly identify the databases that are of use in the idea or problem
that one wishes to explore. In this section, we present some details about a few of the popular
bibliographic databases most sought after by engineering researchers, but do not attempt to provide
exhaustive details.
2.3.1 Web of Science
Web of Science (formerly known as ISI or Thomson Reuters) includes multiple databases, as well
as specialized tools. It is a good search tool for scholarly materials requiring institutional license
and allows the researcher to search in a particular topic of interest, which can be made by selection
in fields that are available in drop down menu such as title, topic, author, address, etc. The tool
also allows sorting by number of citations (highest to lowest), publication date.
Put quotes around phrases, add more keywords, or use the “Refine Results” panel on the left to
narrow down the search by keyword, phrases in quotation marks, type of material such as peer-
reviewed journal articles, date, language, and more. Expanding the search results is possible by
looking for alternate word endings, breaking the search concepts down, thinking of alternate search
terms (including scientific names if applicable) and connecting them with OR, and using the
database’s features for
finding additional references. “Cited reference search” option enables a researcher to trace articles
which have cited a formerly published paper. Using this element, it is possible to find how a
familiar idea has been applied, improved, or extended subsequently. A structured search like this
that enables narrowing and refining what one is looking for is effective to ensure that the results
throw up relevant sources and time spent in studying those is likely to be well utilized. Based on
the researcher’s need the search result can be broadened or narrowed down using the built-in fields
provided in this website. When clicked on any of the search results, this website provides the title
of the paper, authors, the type of journal, volume, issue number and year of publication, abstract,
keywords, etc., so that the researcher has enough information to decide if it is worthwhile to
acquire the full version of the paper.

2.3.2 Google and Google Scholar

Google is a great place to start one’s search when one is starting out on a topic. It can be helpful
in finding freely available information, such as reports from governments, organizations,
companies, and so on. However, there are limitations:
(i) It’s a “black box” of information. It searches everything on the Internet, with no quality
control—one does not know where results are coming from.
(ii) There are limited search functionality and refinement options. What about Google Scholar?
Google Scholar limits one’s search to scholarly literature. However, there are limitations:
1. Some of the results are not actually scholarly. An article may look scholarly at first glance, but
is not a good source upon further inspection.
2. It is not comprehensive. Some publishers do not make their content available to Google Scholar.
3. There is limited search functionality and refinement options. There are search operators that can
be used to help narrow down the results.
These help one find more relevant and useful sources of information.
Operators can be combined within searches. Here are some basic ones that one can use:
(i) OR—Broadens search by capturing synonyms or variant spellings of a concept. Example:
Synchronous OR asynchronous will find results that have either term present.
(ii) Brackets/Parentheses ( )—Gather OR’d synonyms of a concept together, while combining
them with another concept. Example: RAM (synchronous OR asynchronous).
(iii) Quotation marks “ ”—Narrow the search by finding words together as a phrase, instead of
separately. Example: RAM (synchronous OR asynchronous) “Texas Instruments”.
(iv) Site—limits the search to results from a specific domain or website. This operator
is helpful when searching specific websites such as the BC government,
which is Example:RAM(synchronous OR asynchronous) “Texas Instruments” site:
[Link]
(v) Filetype—limits the search to results with a specific file extension one could look for pdf’s,
PowerPoint presentations, Excel spreadsheets, and so on. Example: RAM (synchronous OR
asynchronous) “Texas Instruments” site: [Link] filetype: pdf.

The Search Tools button at the top of the Google results gives you a variety of other options, such
as limiting the results by date. There are other operators and tools that one can use in Google and
Google Scholar. Google is but one search tool a researcher can use—it is not the only one!
It can be hard to sift through all the results in Google or Google Scholar, especially if the intent is
to find scholarly resources from a specific subject area. To find the best resources on a topic, one
should search in academic databases, in addition to Google.
Databases provide access to journal articles and conference proceedings, as well as other scholarly
resources. One gets more relevant and focused results, because they have better quality control
and search functionality. One should choose a database based on subject area, date coverage, and
publication type. Interfaces vary between databases, but the search techniques remain essentially
the same.
2.4 Effective Search: The Way Forward
A scholarly publication is one wherein the published outcome is authored by researchers in a
specific field of skill. Such work cites all source contents used and is generally peer reviewed for
accuracy and validity before publication. Essentially, the audience for such works is fellow experts
and students in the field. The content is typically more complex and advanced than those found in
general magazines. While most of the engineering researchers need to refer articles that appear in
scholarly journals, books or other peer-reviewed sources, there is also a substantially useful content
in more popular publications. These are informal in approach and aim to reach a large number of
readers including both the experts in the filed and also amateurs, but the content focuses on news
and trends in the field. Research outcomes are not typically first disseminated here but are usually
meant for general reading.
A researcher should use all search tools for comprehensive search. No one place or one source
exists that will provide all the information one needs; one will likely
need to look in all the places that would be described in this chapter and in others not mentioned.
A researcher must consider what type of information is needed, and where it could be found. Not
all information is available online. Some information is only available in print. It can take time for
scholarly and peer-reviewed information to be published.
One might not be able to find scholarly information about something currently being reported in
the news. The information may not be available, or studies on a topic of interest to the researcher
have not occurred. In such a case, the researcher should look for similar studies that would be
applicable to the specific topic; look for broad information (general process, technology, etc.), as
well as information that addresses the specific context of the researcher’s report.
Searching is an iterative process:
• Experiment with different keywords and operators;
• Evaluate and assess results, use filters;
• Modify the search as needed; and
• When relevant articles are found, look at their citations and references.
After the search is complete, the researcher needs to engage in critical and thorough reading,
making observation of the salient points in those sources, and summarize the findings. A detailed
comparison and contrast of the findings is also required to be done. This entire process may be
needed to be done multiple times.
The conclusion of the entire process of literature survey includes a summary of the relevant and
important work done, and also the identification of the missing links and the challenges in the open
problems in the area under study. One must note that the literature survey is a continuous and
cyclical process that may involve the researcher going back and forth till the end of the research
project.
Not many people begin research work in their graduate program with an already acquired skill to
efficiently parse math-heavy articles quickly, but those who eventually succeed in an engineering
research career quickly develop that skill from reading a lot of papers, seeking help in
understanding confusing parts, and getting through relevant coursework to build up the required
skills and intuition.
It is very important to not lose sight of the purpose of an extensive search or literature survey, for
it is possible to spend a very significant amount of one’s time doing so and actually falsely think
that one is working hard. Nothing will come of it unless one is an active reader and spends
sufficient time to develop one’s own ideas build on what one has read. It is not as if literature
survey ends and then research begins, for new literature keeps appearing, and as one’s
understanding of the problem grows, one finds new connections and related/evolving problems
which may need more search. It is mandatory for a Ph.D. scholar to write a synopsis of the topic
and submit it to the doctoral committee for approval. During this stage, the scholar needs to
undertake an extensive literature survey connected with the problem. For this purpose, the archived
journals and published or unpublished bibliographies are the first place to check out. One source
leads to another.
It is now imperative for any active researcher to keep oneself abreast with research outcomes in
their field of interest. Finding the right work to read can be difficult. The literature where
knowledge is archived is very fragmented and there are bits and pieces all over the place. Very
rarely will one find everything that one wants close together in one place. However, it is obvious
that the number of papers relevant to a particular researcher is very few, compared to the actual
number of research papers available from peer-reviewed technical sources. It is also important to
know where to read from; relying on refereed journals and books published by reputed publishers
is always better than relying on easily available random articles off the web. While reading an
engineering research paper, the goal is to understand the technical contributions that the authors
are making. Given the abundance of journal articles, it is useful to adopt a quick, purposeful, and
useful way of reading these manuscripts .
It is not the same as reading a newspaper. It may require rereading the paper multiple times and
one might expect to spend many hours reading the paper. A simple, efficient, and logical approach
is described in this section for identifying articles and reading them suitably for effective research.
Amount of time to be spent will get ascertained after an initial skimming through the paper to
decide whether it is worth careful reading. There will also be papers where it is not worth reading
all the details in the first instance. It is quite possible that the details are of limited value, or simply
one does not feel competent to understand the information yet. Start out the skimming process by
reading the title and keywords (these are anyways, probably what caught the initial attention in the
first place). If on reading these, it does not sufficiently seem to be interesting; it is better to stop
reading and look for something else to read. One should then read the abstract to get an overview
of the paper in minimum time. Again, if it does not seem sufficiently important to the field of
study, one should stop reading further.
If the abstract is of interest, one should skip most of the paper and go straight to the conclusions
to find if the paper is relevant to the intended purpose, and if so, then one should read the figures,
tables, and the captions therein, because these would not take much time but would provide a broad
enough idea as to what was done in the paper. If the paper has continued to be of interest so far,
then one is now ready to delve into the Introduction section to know the background information
about the work and also to ascertain why the authors did that particular study and in what ways the
paper furthers the state of the art.
The next sections to read are the Results and Discussion sections which is really the heart of the
paper. One should really read further sections like the Experimental Setup/Modeling, etc., only if
one is really interested and wishes to understand exactly what was done to better understand the
meaning of the data and its interpretation.
As one works through the literature in this way, one should consider not only the knowledge that
is written down but also the reputation of the people who made that knowledge. A researcher will
always need to be searching for the relevant literature and keeping up to date with it. If one is busy
with a small project, the advisor might just give a single important paper to read. But with a larger
one, you will be searching for one’s own literature to read. For this one will need a strategy as
there is just too
much work out there to read everything.
2.6 Conceptualizing Research
The characteristics of a research objective are that it must have new knowledge at the center, and
that it must be accepted by the community of other researchers and recognized as significant. But
how do we actually conceptualize the research? Besides being original and significant, a good
research problem should also be solvable or achievable. This requirement already asks us to think
about the method and the tools that could be used to obtain that new knowledge. Now, the
significance and the originality and all the theory that we read and tools and methods that we need
to take on a problem, all of these normally come from the existing recorded literature and
knowledge in the field. Coming up with a good research objective, conceptualizing the research
that meets all of these requirements is a tough thing to do. It means that one must already be aware
of what is in the literature. That is, by the time one actually has a good research objective, one is
probably already an expert at the edge of knowledge else it is difficult to say with confidence that
one has a good research objective. If one is doing research at the Ph.D. level or higher, then
conceptualizing the research is probably something that one needs to do oneself. This is a very
tough step because one needs to know all that literature in the field.
So, when working at the Ph.D. level, one needs to be prepared to become that expert, one needs to
be continually reading the literature so as to bring together the three parts:
(i) significant problem, (ii) the knowledge that will address it, and (iii) a possible way to make
that new knowledge. How these three aspects would come together will be different for every
person doing research and it will be different in every field, but the only way to be that expert is
by immersing oneself in the literature and knowing about what already exists in the field.
However, if one is working on a research project that is of a smaller scope than a Ph.D., let us say
a master’s thesis, then conceptualizing the research is possibly too tough to do, and one does not
have the time that it takes to become that expert at the edge of knowledge. In this case, the
researcher needs the help of someone else, typically the supervisor who may already be an expert
and an active researcher in that field, and may advise on what a good research objective might be.
An established researcher in any field should be able to immediately point to the landmark
literature that one should read first. Otherwise one would need to spend a lot of time reading the
literature to discover. As engineers, we like to build things, and that’s good, but the objective of
research is to make knowledge. If one’s research is about building something, one ought to take a
step back and ask if new knowledge is being formulated. Even if what one is building is new and
has never been built before, if it is something that any experienced and competent engineer could
have come up with, one runs the risk of one’s work being labeled obvious and rejected as research.
2.7 Critical and Creative Reading
Reading a research paper is a critical process. The reader should not be under the assumption that
reported results or arguments are correct. Rather, being suspicious and asking appropriate
questions is in fact a good thing. Have the authors attempted to solve the right problem?Are there
simpler solutions that have not been considered? What are the limitations (both stated and ignored)
of the solution and are there any missing links? Are the assumptions that were made reasonable?
Is there a logical flow to the paper or is there a flaw in the reasoning? These need to be ascertained
apart from the relevance and the importance of the work, by careful reading. Use of judgemental
approach and boldness to make judgments is needed while reading. Flexibility to discard previous
erroneous judgments is also critical. Additionally, it is important to ascertain whether the data
presented in the paper is right data to substantiate the argument that was made in the paper and
whether the data was gathered and interpreted in a correct manner.
It is also important to decipher whether some other dataset would have been more compelling.
Critical reading is relatively easy. It is relatively easier to critically read to find the mistakes than
to read it so as to find the good ideas in the paper. Anyone who has been a regular reviewer of
journal articles would agree to such a statement. Reading creatively is harder, and requires a
positive approach in search. In creative reading, the idea is to actively look for other applications,
interesting generalizations, or extended work which the authors might have missed? Are there
plausible modifications that may throw up important practical challenges? One might be able to
decipher properly if one would like to start researching an extended part of this work, and what
should be the immediate next aspect to focus upon.
2.8 Taking Notes While Reading
A researcher reads to write and writes well only if the reading skills are good. The bridge between
reading and actually writing a paper is the act of taking notes during and shortly after the process
of reading. There is a well-known saying that the faintest writing is better than the best memory,
and it applies to researchers who need to read and build on that knowledge to write building on the
notes taken. Many researchers take notes on the margins of their copies of papers or even digitally
on an article aggregator tool. In each research paper, there are a lot of things that one might like
to highlight for later use such as definitions, explanations, and concepts. If there are questions of
criticisms, these need to be written down so as to avoid being forgotten later on. Such efforts pay
significantly when one has to go back and reread the same content after a long time. On completing
a thorough reading, a good technical reading should end with a summary of the paper in a few
sentences describing the contributions.
But to elucidate the technical merit, the paper needs to be looked at from comparative perspective
with respect to existing works in that specific area. A thorough reading should bring out whether
there are new ideas in the paper, or if existing ideas were implemented through experiments or in
a new application, or if different existing ideas were brought together under a novel framework.
Obviously, the type of contribution a paper is actually making can be determined better by having
read other papers in the area.
2.9 Reading Mathematics and Algorithms
Mathematics is often the foundation of new advances, for evolution and development of
engineering research and practice. An engineering researcher generally cannot avoid mathematical
derivations or proofs as part of research work. In fact, these are the heart of any technical paper.
Therefore, one should avoid skimming them. By meticulous reading of the proofs or algorithms,
after having identified the relevance of the paper, one can develop sound understanding about the
problem that the authors have attempted to solve.
Nonetheless, one might skim a technical section if it seems like an explanation of something
already known, or if it is too advanced for the research at the present moment and needs additional
reading to be understandable, or if it seems to specialized and unlikely to be needed in the course
of the research program in which case one can get back to it later on. Implementation of an intricate
algorithm in programming languages such as C, C++ or Java is prone to errors. And even if the
researcher is confident about the paper in hand, and thinks that the algorithm will work, there is
a fair chance that it will not work at all. So one may wish to code it quickly to check if it actually
works.
2.10 Reading a Datasheet
Researchers in different fields of engineering will need to read certain types of documents. For
example, mechanical and civil engineers would need to read drawings related to mechanical parts
and buildings. Researchers in the field of electronics need to read datasheets. On occasions,
researchers in other fields may also need to incorporate a certain electronic part in which case
careful reading of the datasheet is imperative. The same principles as initial skimming of the
datasheet are required to ascertain whether further careful reading is needed.
Datasheets are instruction manuals for electronic components, which (hopefully) details what a
component does and how one may use it. Datasheets enable a researcher (or a working
professional) to design a circuit or debug any given circuit with that component. The first page of
the datasheet usually summarizes a part’s function and features, basic specifications, and usually
provides a functional block diagram with the internal functions of the part. A pinout provides the
physical location of a part’s pins, with special mark for pin 1 so that the part can be correctly
plugged into the circuit. Some parts also provide graphs showing performance versus various
criteria (supply voltage, temperature, etc.), and safe region for reliable operation which should be
carefully read and noted by the researcher. One should be also in the lookout for truth tables which
describe what sort of inputs provide what types of outputs, and also timing diagrams which lay out
how and at what speed data is sent and received from the part. Datasheets usually end with accurate
dimensions of the packages a part is available in. This is useful for printed circuit board (PCB)
layout. When working with a new part, or when deciding which part to use in the research work,
it is recommended to carefully read that part’s datasheet to come up with a bit of shortcut that may
potentially save many hours later on. As already stated, an engineering researcher will have
documents to read which are specific to the branch of engineering in which one is researching in.
However, the objective of the authors herein has been to use datasheets as an example to state the
need to pay attention to the art of reading such documents. Technical published papers or books
are not the only contents that a researcher has to master reading!

Chapter 2
Attributions and Citations: Giving Credit Wherever Due
In this chapter, we highlight the importance of expanding attributions and acknowledgments to
roles and responsibilities beyond primary authors of journal articles or principal investigators of
grant proposal documents. This would be applicable especially to scientific research projects that
involved diverse skill sets and expertise. Academic writing, by definition, must follow certain rules
and conventions. Among the most important of these are the rules and conventions about citing,
referencing, attributing, and acknowledging the works of others. That means giving proper credit
wherever due. Citing is the practice of quoting from, referring to other authors’ works and ideas
in the text of our work in such a way that the context is clear to the reader. Referencing is the
listing of the full publication details of a published work that is cited so as to give background
information to the readers.
Acknowledgment in research publications indicates contributions to scientific work. However,
acknowledgment, attributions, and citations differ in the manner of their application.
Acknowledgment is arguably more personal, singular, and simply an expression of appreciations
and contribution. In this chapter, we address these issues in detail apart from the legal challenges
when attributions and citations are not adequately done.
3.1 Citations: Functions and Attributes
Citations (references) credit others for their work, while allowing the readers to trace the source
publication if needed. Any portion of someone else’s work or ideas in papers, patents, or
presentations must be used in any new document only by clearly citing the source. This applies to
all forms of written sources in the form of texts, images, sounds, etc. and failure to do may be
considered plagiarism which will be described in detail in subsequent chapters of this book. One
should avoid distress and embarrassment by learning exactly what to cite. Depending on the exact
type of material, the researcher may need to give due credit to the creator of the original
source.
The growth of knowledge in any field of study, especially in technological fields, is primarily
incremental and a researcher invariably and naturally builds upon prior information. There are
well-established means of preventing and spreading knowledge through publication of patents,
papers (conference paper and the peer-reviewed journal paper), or articles, and also through
textbooks and classrooms. While it is true that a research needs to leverage the prior art in the area
of research interest so as to make further development, at the same time it is important to ensure
that credit for that existing knowledge is suitably acknowledged. When a bibliography of
previously published patents or papers is placed in the new works of a researcher, a connection is
established between the new and previous work. As per relevance to context, the researcher
provides due credit through the use of a citation. Citations help the readers to verify the quality
and importance of the new work and justification of the findings. It is a way to tell readers that
certain material in the researcher’s present work has come from another source and as an ethical
responsibility, appropriate credit has been given to the original author or writer. Materials that can
be cited include journal papers, conference proceeding, books, theses, newspaper articles,
websites, or other online resources and personal communication. Preferably, citations should be
given at the end of a sentence or the end of a paragraph as can be seen even in this particular
paragraph.
Citation must contain enough details so that readers can easily find the referenced material. A
researcher needs to cite each source twice: (i) in-text citation, in the text of the article exactly where
the source is quoted or paraphrased, and (ii) a second time in the references, typically at the end of
the chapter or a book or at the end of a research article. Most citation styles have the same or
similar elements but differ on the order of elements and layout. Unless otherwise specifically
required by a particular journal or a book, one may choose any style of one’s choice as long as one
is consistent.
The citation elements differ and so what is to be recorded can differ from one source to another. It
is also important to mention the date the source was published and sometimes also the particular
date it was accessed by the researcher if it is related to web content. LaTeX, a document
preparation system often used by engineering researchers to automatically format documents that
comply with standard formatting needs, is very effective to track and update citations. LaTeX has
a steep learning curve and will be repeatedly used in this book to address different issues pertaining
to technical writing which is intimately linked with research for engineers.
There are three main functions of citation:
(i) Verification function: Authors have a scope for finding intentional or unintentional distortion
of research or misleading statements. Citation offers the readers a chance to ascertain if the original
source is justified or not, and if that assertion is properly described in the present work [2].
(ii) Acknowledgment function: Researchers primarily receive credit for their work through
citations. Citations play crucial role in promotion of individual researchers and their continued
employment. Many reputed organizations and institutes provide research funding based on the
reputations of the researchers. Citations help all researchers to enhance their reputation and provide
detailed background of the research work.
(iii) Documentation function: Citations are also used to document scientific concepts and historical
progress of any particular technology over the years [3]. Citations are the currency that authors
would wish to accumulate and the technical community gives them credit for these contributions.
When other authors make citations, they honor those who initiate d the ideas. Authors demonstrate
their comprehension skills by identifying, estimating, and incorporating other’s research work and
then create and express their ownideas precisely while acknowledging ownership of ideas through
citation [4]. Authors should cite sources to indicate significance of the work to the reader. Relevant
citations help authors develop an easily understandable argument and prevent the need to navigate
through work irrelevant to the reader’s interest areas. Failure to cite appropriately infringes on the
rights of the researcher who did the original work.
There are certain cases when references do not fulfill the actual goal of citations and
acknowledgments, and thus do not benefit the reader.
1. Spurious citations: In certain cases, when citation is not required or an appropriate one is not
found, if the author nevertheless goes ahead with including one anyways, it would be considered
as a spurious citation. These sorts of citations do not add any value to the reader in terms of
properly understanding the paper. Such actions result in loss of time of the reader or reviewer in
looking for the cited paper that is otherwise not relevant. Just as due credit should be given to a
paper through citation, inappropriate credit must be avoided so that the credibility of a research
work or of the journal or conference proceedings where that paper is published is not lost through
this sort of carelessness [1].
2. Biased citations:When authors cite thework of their friends or colleagues despite there being no
significant connection between the two works, or when they do not cite work of genuine
significance because they do not wish to give credit in the form of citation to certain individuals,
then such actions can be classified as biased citations. Neglect of citations to prior work whose
conclusions or data contradict the current work is also biased.
3. Self-citations: There is nothing wrong in citing one’s prior work if the citation is really relevant.
Self-citation of prior papers is natural because the latest paper is often a part of a larger research
project which is ongoing. Sometimes, it is also advantageous for the reader because citations of all
the related works of the same author are given in one paper and this may reduce the effort of the
reader in trying to find the full versions of those papers. However, it is helpful and ethical
only if all the papers are really relevant to the present work [5].
However, there can also be negative impact on the journal as well as individual researchers due to
inappropriate and irrelevant self-citations. Self-citations in such cases may be either spurious or
biased or even both. Editors of journals who ignore such types of citations and allow by negligence
or otherwise, to be included in published materials end up directly or indirectly altering the impact
factor of those publications [6].
4. Coercive citations: Despite shortcomings, impact factors remain a primary method of
quantification of research. One side effect is that it creates an incentive for editors to indulge in
coercion to add citations to the editor’s journal. Even if not explicitly stated, the implied message
is that the author could either add citations or risk rejection [7]. Such demands consequently
diminish the reputation of the journal. From the above discussions, it is clear that the author(s)
must maintain a balance between too few and too many citations. At the same time, author(s) must
give credit whenever due even if it is their own work.

3.2 Impact of Title and Keywords on Citations

The citation rate of any research paper depends on various factors including significance and
availability of the journal, publication types, research area, and importance of the published
research work. Other factors like length of the title, type of the title, and selected keywords also
impact the citation count [8].
Title is the most important attribute of any research paper. It is the main indication of the research
area or subject and is used by researcher as a source of information during literature survey. Title
plays important role in marketing and makes research papers traceable. Agood title is informative,
represents a paper effectively to readers, and gains their attention. Some titles are informative but
do not capture attention of readers, some titles are attractive but not informative or related to the
readers’ research area [9]. The download count and citation of a research paper might be influenced
by title. There are three different aspects which provide a particular behavior to the title: (i) types
of the title, (ii) length of the title, and (iii) presence of specific markers [10]. Stremersch et al. [11]
analyzed title characteristics of the papers published during 1990–2002 in the area of research and
studied relationship between title characteristics and citation, which concluded that title length
positively affects the number of citations. In another study, Sagi and Yechiam [12] found that
highly amusing titles have fewer citations and pleasant titles have no significant relation with
citations. In yet another study, Jacques and Sebire [8] analyzed different papers’ titles and their
citations hit for 25 most-cited and 25 least-cited research and review papers of a particular genre
of journals, and found a strong association between title lengths and citation rates, with highly
cited articles having more than twice as many words in the title compared with lower cited papers.
Jamali and Nikzad [13] analyzed several open access papers and found that articles with question-
type titles are downloaded more but poorly cited compared to the descriptive or declarative titles.
Declarative titles are downloaded and cited less than descriptive titles but difference is not much
[13]. As per analysis of Habibzadeh and Yadollahie [14], longer titles are strongly associated with
higher citation rates. Longer titles mainly include the study methodology and/or results in more
detail, and so attracts more attention and citations [14]. In general, titles containing a question
mark, colon, and reference to a specific geographical region are associated with lower citation
rates, also result-describing titles usually get citations than method-describing titles. Additionally,
review articles and original articles usually receive more citations than short communication
articles. At least two keywords in the title can increase the chance of finding and reading the
article as well as get more citations.
Keywords represent essential information as well as main content of the article, which are relevant
to the area of research. Search engines, journal, digital libraries, and indexing services use
keywords for categorization of the research topic and to direct thework to the relevant
[Link] are important to ensure that readers are aware about research articles and their
content [15]. If maximum number of allowable keywords are used, then the chance of the article
being found increases and so does the probability of citation count of the article. Usage of new
keywords should
be minimal as such keywords may not be well known to the research community and so may lead
to low visibility of the article.
3.3 Knowledge Flow Through Citation
Knowledge flows through verbal communications, books, documents, video, audio, and images,
which plays a powerful role in research community in promoting the formulation of new
knowledge. In engineering research, knowledge flow is primarily in the form of books, thesis,
articles, patents, and reports. Citing a source is important for transmission of knowledge from
previous work to an innovation [16]. Production of knowledge can be related to the citation
network. Knowledge flow happens between co-authors during research collaboration, among other
researchers through their paper citation network, and also between institutions, departments,
research fields or topics, and elements of research [17]. Figure 3.1 shows the relationship between
citations, knowledge flow, and elements such as researchers, papers, journal publications or
conferences, and institutions. If paper A is cited by paper B, then knowledge flows through citation
networks across institutions.
The complex interdisciplinary nature of research encourages scholars to cooperate with each other
to grab more advantages through collaboration, thereby improving quality of the research.
Sooryamoorthy [18] examined the citation impact of the South African publications among
different collaboration types, discipline and sectors, and observed that co-authored publications
had more citations than single author paper and there was a positive co-relation between number
of authors and the number of citations [18]. Figure 3.2 shows a relationship between co-authorship
and different
Fig. 3.1 Citation-based knowledge flow [17]
types of citations. Three articles (X, Y, and Z) and five references (X1, X2, X3, Y1, and Y2) of
article X and Y, respectively, are considered. A, B, and C are authors of article X, and D, E, F, G,
and also A are authors of article Y. Article Z has two authors H and E. References X1, X2, X3,
Y1, and Y2 have authors (A, P), (H, R), (D), (Q, B, F), and (R), respectively. Based on co-
authorship citation network, references X1 and Y1 are considered self-citation, reference X3 is a
level-1 co-author citation because author of articleY is direct collaborator of author A, reference
X2 is a level-1 co-author network because author A is collaborator of E who collaborated with H.
We conclude that papers which frequently cite collaborators will also often cite collaborators of
collaborators. Collaborations certainly impact citation counts.
3.3.1 Citing Datasets
The nature of engineering research has evolved rapidly and now relies heavily on data to justify
claims and provide experimental evidences [20] and so data citations must fetch proper credit to
the creator of the dataset as citations of other objects like research articles. Data citations should
have provisions to give credit and legal

Fig. 3.2 Co-authorship network [19]

Attribution to all contributors, enable identification and access, while recognizing that a specific
style may not apply to all data [21].
Ascertaining the ownership of data can be a complicated issue especially with large datasets, and
issues of funding can also make it a difficult matter. A researcher should obtain necessary
permission for using data from a particular source. Citations related to datasets should include
enough information so that a reader could find the same dataset again in the future, even if the link
provided no longer works. It is proper to include a mixture of general and specific information to
enable a reader to be certain that the search result is the same dataset that was sought.
3.3.2 Styles for Citations
Citation styles differ primarily in the order, and syntax of information about references, depending
on difference in priorities attributed to concision, readability, dates, authors, and publications.
Some of the most common styles for citation (as well as other aspects of technical writing) used
by engineers are as follows:
1. ASCE style (American Society of Civil Engineers)2
(a) Reference list: This part is to be placed in the bibliography or references at the end of the
articlereport. A template with example for the same is
given below:

(b) In-text citation for journals or books: The following part is to be placed right after the reference
to the source of the citation assignment:
2. IEEE style (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)3 IEEE style is standard for all
IEEE journals and magazines, and is frequently used for papers and articles in the fields of
electrical engineering and computer science. The IEEE style requires endnotes and that references
be cited numerically in the text.
Those submitting to an IEEE publication should see guidelines for the specific journal or magazine
and may also refer to the complete IEEE editorial style manual. Some examples of IEEE styles of
citations for different types of sources are enumerated below:

3. ASME style (The Association of Mechanical Engineers)4

3.4 Acknowledgments and Attributions

Acknowledgment section is a place to provide a brief appreciation of the contribution of someone
or an organization or funding body to the present work. If no particular guideline is available for
the intended publication, then it can be introduced at the end of the text or as a footnote.
Acknowledgment is a common practice to recognize persons or agencies for being responsible in
some form or other for completion of a publishable research outcome. Acknowledgment displays
a relationship among people, agencies, institutions, and research. In some case, certain individuals
may help in the research work but may not deserve to be included as authors. As a sign of gratitude,
such contributions should be acknowledged. Classification of acknowledgment into six different
categories like moral, financial, editorial, institutional or technical, and conceptual support.

Acknowledgments and attributions are also very important in the publications of journal or
conference papers. Giving proper credit wherever it is due is very important and even if the
contribution is minor, it should not be neglected. A researcher should always recognize the
proprietary interest of others. Whenever possible, author shall give name of persons who may be
responsible, even if nominally, for designs, inventions, writings, or other accomplishments. Given
the importance of work published, authorship is also important. The reward triangle theory shows
a relationship between citations, acknowledgment, and authorship. In engineering research,
acknowledgments are meant for participating technicians, students, funding agency, grant number,
institution, or anyone who provide scientific inputs, shared unpublished results, provided
equipment, or participated in discussions.
3.4.1 What Should Be Acknowledged?
Every author should know that what should/should not be acknowledged. Author should
acknowledge quotation, ideas, facts, paraphrasing, funding organization, oral discussion or
support, laboratory, and computer work.
(i) Quotation: In technical writing such as in the field of engineering, quotes are used very rarely.
Quotations are of two types:
(a) Direct quotations are used when author use actual words or sentences in the same order as the
original one. Author should use quotation marks for the words or sentences with proper
acknowledgment.
(b) Indirect quotation summarizes or paraphrases the actual quote. In such cases, it is important to
acknowledge with proper name and date.
(ii) Authors should acknowledge people who give appropriate contribution in their research work.
Non-research work contributions are not generally acknowledged in a scientific paper but it may
be in a thesis. Persons must be acknowledged by authors, who gave a scientific or technical
guidance, take part in some discussions, or shared information to author. Authors should
acknowledge assistants, students, or technicians, who helped experimentally and theoretically
during the research work.
(iii) If the researcher received grant from a funding agency and if those funds were used in the
work reported in the publication, then such support should always be acknowledged by providing
full details of the funding program and grant number in the acknowledgment section.
The authors should also gratefully acknowledge use of the services and facilities of any center or
organization with which they are not formally affiliated to [22].
An example of acknowledgment of grant received is as follows:

If there are any concerns that the provision of the information provided in acknowledgment may
compromise the anonymity dependent on the peer review policy of a particular journal or
conference proceedings, the author(s) may withhold the acknowledgment information until the
submission of the final accepted manuscript. Many technical journals explicitly discourage authors
to thank the reviewers in their article submissions. This could be construed as favoritism or an
attempt to encourage reviewers to accept their manuscript for reasons other than scientific merit.
(iv) Acknowledging that results have been presented elsewhere: If the results were presented as an
abstract in a journal, then there should be a suitable citation. If the results were presented as part
of scientific meeting, symposium, or other gathering, then some relevant information should be
provided. At the very least, the name of the gathering and year should be cited. Other helpful items
include the location of the gathering (city and state or country) and the full date of the occasion.
By acknowledging all help received in one’s research work, the author(s) demonstrate integrity as
a researcher, which in turn encourages continued collaboration from those who helped out in
different ways. One may also appropriately bolster one’s colleagues’ careers, as being credited in
an acknowledgment section is emerging as one of many ways a researcher’s professional impact
is evaluated. Acknowledgment is no longer simply a means of expressing gratitude. Funding
agencies these days often require that their grant be acknowledged and explicitly state the exact
information to be provided if the research work leads to a publication. The grantee is responsible
for assuring that an acknowledgment of support is made in any publication (including websites)
of any direct or indirect outcomes from the funded project. The format of required information is
often explicitly stated in the terms and conditions of grants provided. Acknowledgments are also
appropriate in technical presentations. Failure to acknowledge funding may result in the
discontinuation of current funding and/or ineligibility to receive future funding for a certain
number of years or indefinitely. Unless the information can be considered “common knowledge,”5
proper attribution of an idea, algorithm, computational methodology, or experimental design is
required even if a journal operates with double-blind review.6

3.4.2 Acknowledgments in Books/Dissertations

A page of acknowledgments is usually included at the beginning of a thesis/ dissertation
immediately following the table of contents. These acknowledgments are longer than the one or
two sentence statements in journal papers or articles in conference proceedings. These detailed
acknowledgments enable the researcher to thank all those who have contributed in completion of
the research work. Careful thought needs to be given concerning those whose inputs are to be
acknowledged and in what order. Generally, one should express appreciation in a concise manner
and avoid emotive language. The following are often acknowledged in these types of
acknowledgments: main supervisor, second supervisor, peers in the lab, other academic staff in
the department, technical or support staff in the department, colleagues from other departments,
other institutions, or organizations, former students, family, and friends.
3.4.3 Dedication or Acknowledgments?
Dedication is almost never used in a journal paper, an article in a conference proceedings, or a
patent, and it is used exclusively in larger documents like books, thesis, or dissertations. While
acknowledgments are reserved for those who helped out with the book in some way or another
(editing, moral support, etc), a dedication is to whomever the author would like it to be dedicated
to, whether it is the author’s mother, the best friend, the pet dog, or Almighty God. And yes, it is
possible to dedicate something to someone while also mentioning them in the acknowledgments.
For example, one may dedicate a book to one’s spouse, but acknowledge them for being the moral
support and putting up with when one got very stressed. The acknowledgments in technical books
can be sometimes as brief as the ones in journal articles. The acknowledgment section of a
technical report may be a paragraph that is longer than a journal paper but shorter than
dissertations. Generally, the length of the acknowledgment may have some correlation with the
length of the document.

Summary
Citation is a specific form of attribution, but attribution itself can be done in many different ways.
For engineers, citation is very useful to their careers due to the prevailing publish or perish
environment. Proper citation and reference:
• Gives credit and respect to the original author(s).
• Allows readers to find the original source(s).
• Strengthens the credibility of your report.
If a researcher does not cite the sources, it is plagiarism.
Plagiarism is using another person’s ideas without giving credit or citation and is an intellectual
theft. Plagiarism comes in varying degrees, and there are serious consequences for a researcher if
caught plagiarizing. All academic and industrial research organizations have integrity and
misconduct policies. Even past one’s time at a research organization, evidence of plagiarism can
affect the integrity and credibility and can also retrospectively make an earned degree null and
void.

Chapter 2
References
1. Shaw, J. (1995). System, 23(3), 325–334.
2. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 13–23.
3. Pautasso,M. (2013).Ten simple rules for writing a literature review. Plos Computational
Biology, 9(7), e1003149.
4. Maier, H. (2013). What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter?
Environmental Modelling & Software, 43, 3–4.
5. Galvan, J. (2006). Writing literature reviews (3rd ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.
6. Gasparyan, A. (2013). Bibliographic databases: Some critical points. Journal of Korean Medical
Science, 28(6), 799.
7. Subramanyam, R. (2013). Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively. Journal
of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, 17(1), 65.
Chapter 3
References
1. Mack, C. (2012, Jul–Sept). How to write a good scientific paper: Citations. Journal of
Micro/Nanolithography, MEMS, and MOEMS, 11(3).
2. West, R., & Stenius, K. (2008). Use and abuse of citation. In Chap. 7. Publishing addiction
science: A guide for the perplexed (2nd ed.). International Society of Addiction Journal Editors.
3. Smith, L. (1981, Summer). Citation analysis. Graduate School of Library and Information
Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
4. Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (1995). The craft of research. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
5. Mavrogenis, A., & Papagelopoulos, P. (2010, October). Self-citation in publishing. Clinical
Orthopaedics and Related Research.
6. Esfe, M. H., Wongwises, S., Asadi, A., Karimipour, A., & Akbari, M. (2015). Mandatory and
self-citation; types, reasons, their benefits and disadvantages. Science and Engineering Ethics,
21(6), 1581–1585.
7. Wilhite, A. W., & Fong, E. A. (2012). Coercive citation in academic publishing. Science, 335,
542–543.
8. Jacques, T., & Sebire, N. (2010). The impact of article titles on citation hits: An analysis of
general and specialist medical journals. JRSM Short Reports, 1(1), 1–5.
9. Kane, T. (2000). The Oxford essential guide to writing (1st ed., p. 58). New York: Berkley
Books.
10. Subotic, S., & Mukherjee, B. (2013). Short and amusing: The relationship between title
characteristics,
downloads, and citations in psychology articles. Journal of Information Science,
40(1), 115–124.
11. Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article
impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171–193.
12. Sagi, I.,&Yechiam, E. (2008). Amusing titles in scientific journals and article citation. Journal
of Information Science, 34(5), 680–687.
13. Jamali,H.,&Nikzad,M. (2011).Article title type and its relationwith the number of downloads
and citations. Scientometrics, 88(2), 653–661.
14. Habibzadeh, F.,&Yadollahie, M. (2010). Are shorter article titlesmore attractive for citations?
Cross-sectional study of 22 scientific journals. Croatian Medical Journal, 51(2), 165–170.
15. Uddin, S., & Khan, A. (2016). The impact of author-selected keywords on citation counts.
Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1166–1177.
16. Renoust, B., Claver, V., & Baffier, J. (2017). Multiplex flows in citation networks. Applied
Network Science, 2(1).
17. Zhang, J., Wang, H., & Sun, Y. (2013). Exploring citation-based knowledge flow in scientific
research. In 2013 Ninth International Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grids.
18. Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and
citation patterns of South African science publications. Scientometrics, 81(1), 177–193.
19. Wallace, M., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2012). A small world of citations? The influence of
collaboration networks on citation practices. Plos ONE, 7(3), e33339.
20. Hey, T., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. (Eds.). (2009). The fourth paradigm: Data-intensive scientific
discovery. USA: Microsoft Research.
21. Silvello, G., & Ferro, N. (2016, May). Data citation is coming. Introduction to the special issue
on data citation. Bulletin of IEEE Technical Committee on Digital Libraries, 12(1).
22. Elliot, C. (2014). Acknowledgments in scientific publications and presentations. Department
of Physics, University of Illinois.