References not showing up

I have published two articles a good high ranking journals. My first published in January has been cited by good journals 5 times, and 7 times all together but crossref is only showing 1 citation.

The second article has been cited twice but showing citations of zero. Is there any reason why this would be? Is this something I need to fix? Google scholar appears to be showing the results accurately.

Thanks a lot!

Hi Dr. Wood. Thanks for your questions.

Crossref’s Cited-by counts only reflect the number of times a given DOI is matched as being cited by another piece of content that:

  1. is also registered with Crossref and

  2. has references included in the metadata deposited by the publisher when they register its DOI.

Not all scholarly publications are registered with Crossref and not all publishers opt to provide references along with their DOI’s metadata, so we can’t claim that our cited-by counts are comprehensive representations of all instances in which a given content item has been cited.

This may explain why you see different results in different services or don’t see the results you expect in our service.

If you believe that both the cited and citing works are registered with Crossref, you can let us know the DOIs for each, and I’ll be happy to check whether the citing works’ publishers have supplied references to us for those items.

1 Like

Dear Shayn,

Yes some of the citations are registered with Dois. I attach them all below.

A) My article: * Full article: A dialogic technology-mediated model of feedback uptake and literacy

B) Citing article Dois: 1. *
2. *
3. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6440-0.ch009
4. *
5. *

My second article: *

Citing article 1. *
2. Sustainability | Free Full-Text | Sustaining Synchronous Interaction Effectiveness in Distance Writing Courses: A Mixed Method Study in a KSA University

Is there something I can do so I don’t have to update the citations manually every time?

Best wishes,


Hi James.

Well, the good news and bad news is that citations can’t be updated manually. We can only assert citations when they’re derived from the references supplied in the DOIs’ metadata by the citing works’ publishers.

Taylor and Francis registered the DOI for your article - 10.1080/02602938.2020.1852174 - with metadata that corresponds to the following:

Wood, J. (2021). A dialogic technology-mediated model of feedback uptake and literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(8), 1173–1190.

1.When they registered this DOI 10.1080/02602938.2021.1967283 they did supply references in its metadata. This is the reference that most closely matched your work

<citation key="CIT0071">
<journal_title>Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education</journal_title>
<author>Wood J.</author>

The main problem is the first page is given as 1 and not 1173. I’d guess that the author was citing a pre-publication manuscript which didn’t have the final pagination yet. But, the incorrect page number, and lack of any other distinguishing metadata (no volume number, issue number, or article title) prevented our system from establishing that reference as a citation to your article.

  1. Same situation as above for 10.1080/02602938.2021.1969637 There were two very similar citations, distinguished only by publication year, insufficient metadata to make a match to your article.
<citation key="CIT0030">
<journal_title>Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education</journal_title>
<author>Wood J.</author>

<citation key="CIT0031">
<journal_title>Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education</journal_title>
<author>Wood J.</author>
  1. The metadata for 10.4018/978-1-7998-6440-0.ch009 did not include a reference for your work. In the reference list supplied, which looks to be alphabetical, it skipped right from Winstone to Yorke. That’s consistent with the reference list displayed on that work’s landing page Examining Feedback Practices in WIL Subjects: A Case Study | IGI Global

  2. 10.1080/17439884.2021.1936547 and 10.1080/02602938.2021.2001430 both have the same situation as items 1 and 2 above. It may be significant that these were all registered by the same publisher.

I can reach out to our contacts at Taylor & Francis and pass along your concerns about these missing citations. If they agree that the references were supplied incorrectly, they can submit updated metadata for the citing works’ DOIs which will enable our system to assert the citations for your article’s DOI.

In the case of the second article - 10.1080/02602938.2021.1914544 - the metadata supplied by its publisher corresponds to

Wood, J. (2021). Making peer feedback work: the contribution of technology-mediated dialogic peer feedback to feedback uptake and literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–20.

  1. 10.1080/02602938.2021.1914544 - this is the DOI of the cited article.

  2. 10.3390/su132413675 - this one worked correctly. The publisher MDPI supplied a reference with your article’s DOI directly, which is obviously the most foolproof way of ensuring a citation.

<citation key="ref20">

When you query the cited-by count for 10.1080/02602938.2021.1914544 in our system, it shows 1 citation. That citation came from 10.3390/su132413675

I hope that helps clarify. I’ll let you know when I hear back from Taylor and Francis about the four DOIs that cite your first article.