🔴 **Paper self-citation: An unexplored phenomenon**

_“In total, we obtained 44,857 papers that have self-citation relations in the WoS raw dataset. In part, they are database artefacts but in part they are due to papers citing themselves in the conclusion or appendix. We also found cases where paper self-citations occur due to publisher-made highlights promoting and citing the paper.”_

Haunschild, R. and Bornmann, L. (2025) Paper self-citation: An unexplored phenomenon. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.04324v1.

#Academia #Academics #SelfCitation #Citations

Paper self-citation: An unexplored phenomenon

In this study, we investigated a phenomenon that one intuitively would assume does not exist: self-citations on the paper basis. Actually, papers citing themselves do exist in the Web of Science (WoS) database. In total, we obtained 44,857 papers that have self-citation relations in the WoS raw dataset. In part, they are database artefacts but in part they are due to papers citing themselves in the conclusion or appendix. We also found cases where paper self-citations occur due to publisher-made highlights promoting and citing the paper. We analyzed the self-citing papers according to selected metadata. We observed accumulations of the number of self-citing papers across publication years. We found a skewed distribution across countries, journals, authors, fields, and document types. Finally, we discuss the implications of paper self-citations for bibliometric indicators.

arXiv.org

Not a good look for MDPI and Frontiers: a new preprint finds clear signs of self-citation having boosted their journals' Impact Factors.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/5t8v7

#JournalImpactFactor #Citations #Bibliometrics #PublicationEthics #ImpactFactor #SelfCitation #AcademicPublishing #JournalPublication

OSF

My new publication in #Scientometrics about university rankings. If you self-cite your papers too much, a hump will form in the visualization of your h-index. Does the presence of a hump necessarily indicate #manipulation? – Not necessarily, but it is an interesting anomaly in the #citation data:

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04886-0

#citations #hindex #selfcitation #university #rankings #Scopus

“If we want to reduce these distorting practices, then we have to take away the incentive to do them. It’s a systemic corruption of the process.”

I spoke to Dalmeet Singh Chawla about coercive citation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01532-w

#PublicationEthics #CoerciveCitation #SelfCitation #Referencing #Bibliometrics #NatureNews

Researchers who agree to manipulate citations are more likely to get their papers published

Data suggest that these researchers are more willing to publish in journals that participate in such coercion.

Prolific #autism researcher has two dozen papers retracted

👉 An autism researcher lost two dozen papers to #retraction 8 years after the publisher was made aware of potentially troubling editorial practices. #Elsevier cited undisclosed conflicts of interest, duplicated methodology and a “compromised” #peerreview process as reasons for the #retractions.

https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/prolific-autism-researcher-has-two-dozen-papers-retracted/

#peerreviewing #research #science #ethics #Publishing #selfcitation #metrics

Prolific autism researcher has two dozen papers retracted

Elsevier’s retractions focus on peer review and conflicts of interest.

Spectrum | Autism Research News