Abstract
Background and Study Aim.
In the context of the increasing volume of scientific publications, the adequacy and effectiveness of source use in key sections of articles become crucial tasks. This requires detailed consideration, especially in light of potential duplication of references, which can affect the perception of originality and depth of research. The purpose of this article is to investigate the nature and impact of duplicate references in the 'Introduction' and 'Discussion' sections of scientific articles on physical education and sports.
Reference41 articles.
1. Kearney MH. The Discussion Section Tells Us Where We Are. Research in Nursing & Health, 2017;40(4): 289–291. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21803
2. Conn VS. How to Craft a Strong Discussion Section. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 2017;39(5): 607–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945916650196
3. Hoefler M, Venz J, Trautmann S, Miller R. Writing a discussion section: how to integrate substantive and statistical expertise. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2018;18: 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0490-1
4. Al-Shujairi YBJ, Tan H, Abdullah AN, Nimehchisalem V, Imm LG. Lexical Bundles in the Discussion Section Moves of High Impact Medical Research Articles. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 2020;28(3): 2043–2061.1.
5. Chambers DW. The Discussion section. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2021;160(6): 894–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.08.002