Quotation Accuracy Matters: An Examination of How an Influential Meta-Analysis on Active Learning Has Been Cited

Abstract

When previous research is cited incorrectly, misinformation can infiltrate scientific discourse and undermine scholarly knowledge. One of the more damaging citation issues involves incorrectly citing article content (called quotation errors); therefore, investigating quotation accuracy is an important research endeavor. One field where quotation accuracy is needed is in the learning sciences given its impact on pedagogy. An integral article in pedagogical discussions surrounding how to teach at the college level is the meta-analysis on active learning by Freeman et al. The Freeman et al. meta-analysis compared active learning to traditional lecture in terms of its effects on student learning and has been important in national initiatives on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) reform. Given its influence coupled with the impact quotation errors could have in scientific discourse, we used citation context analysis to analyze whether assertions in the citing text that related to the efficacy of lecture and active learning were supported by what was explicitly stated in the cited meta-analysis. Assertions were analyzed undersupported, unsupported, or irrelevant for purposes of study categories. The most prevalent supported category related to active learning being more effective than lecture; the most prevalent unsupported category related to the effectiveness of specific activities/approaches other than the general approach of active learning. Overall, the percentage of supported assertions was 47.67%, and the percentage of unsupported assertions was 26.01%. Furthermore, the percentage of articles containing at least one unsupported assertion was 34.77%. Proactive measures are needed to reduce the incidence of quotation errors to ensure robust scientific integrity.