Self-citations, a trend prevalent across subject disciplines at the global level: an overview

Published on Jul 3, 2017in Collection Building
· DOI :10.1108/CB-03-2017-0008
Ramesh Pandita3
Estimated H-index: 3
(Baba Ghulam Shah Badshah University),
Shivendra Singh3
Estimated H-index: 3
(Baba Farid University of Health Sciences)
Purpose The present study aims to determine the prevailing trend of self-citations across 27 major subject disciplines at global level. The study also examines the aspects like percentage of self-citations in each individual subject discipline and the average number of self-citations per publication across different subject disciplines. The study also investigates self-citation percentage of research articles published from the 20 leading research countries of the world and across the continents. Design/methodology/approach The study is supported by empirical findings undertaken on secondary data retrieved from SCImago Journal and Country Ranking, which is entirely based on the SCOPUS data source (SCImago, 2014). Findings In all, 76,634,557 citations were received by as many as 14,946,975 research articles published from 2008-2012 at an average of 5.12 citations per article. Of the total citations received, 26,404,609 (34.45 per cent) were self-citations, which means that of the total citations received by each research article, 1.76 are self-citations. Compared to subject disciplines falling under social and humanistic sciences, pure and applied sciences have shown a greater trend of self-citation. On average, 4.18 self-citations were observed in each research article published in multidisciplinary subject disciplines. Of the total citations received by research articles published in the discipline of Psychology, 43.69 per cent are self-citations, the highest among all the subject disciplines under study. Of the total self-citations received by all the subject disciplines under study, 18.43 per cent were received alone in medicine, highest among all, whereas Social and Humanistic sciences received less than 1.00 per cent self-citations, the lowest among all the subject disciplines. Originality/value This study is original and first of its kind covering each individual subject discipline having global scope.
  • References (19)
  • Citations (3)
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
104 Citations
3 Citations
2 Citations
78% of Scinapse members use related papers. After signing in, all features are FREE.
3 CitationsSource
The present study examines the research output and citation analysis in the field of Oncology, a branch of medical science which deals with the study and treatment of tumours, what we commonly know as cancer. Cancer as a disease is not confined to a particular region or a country, but is a global phenomenon and is still beyond the complete understanding and control of medicos. Research in the field of biomedical sciences in general and oncology is particular is undertaken at global level with al...
1 CitationsSource
I studied the factors (citations, self-citations, and number of articles) that influenced large changes in only 1 year in the impact factors (IFs) of journals. A set of 360 instances of journals with large increases or decreases in their IFs from a given year to the following was selected from journals in the Journal Citation Reports from 1998 to 2007 (40 journals each year). The main factor influencing large changes was the change in the number of citations. About 54% of the increases and 42% o...
25 CitationsSource
11 CitationsSource
#1Ernesto Gianoli (UdeC: University of Concepción)H-Index: 32
#2Marco A. Molina-Montenegro (UdeC: University of Concepción)H-Index: 22
We analyze the publication output of 119 Chilean ecologists and find strong evidence that self-citations significantly affect the h-index increase. Furthermore, we show that the relationship between the increase in the h-index and the proportion of self-citations differs between high and low h-index researchers. In particular, our results show that it is in the low h-index group where self-citations cause the greater impact. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
18 CitationsSource
#1Leif Engqvist (University of Bonn)H-Index: 21
#2Joachim G. Frommen (University of Bonn)H-Index: 23
The h-index [1] has been claimed to provide a simple way to compare objectively the scientific achievement of researchers and has rapidly become one of the most favoured measures of scientific output [2]. The h-index is an author's number of articles (h) that have received at least h citations [1], and thus depends on the number of a researcher's publications and their impact. Some recent articles have called for cautious use of the h-index [3–7]. In particular, its robustness against self-citat...
88 CitationsSource
#1Iina HellstenH-Index: 17
#2Renaud Lambiotte (University of Liège)H-Index: 42
Last. Marcel Ausloos (University of Liège)H-Index: 44
view all 4 authors...
This paper introduces a new approach to detecting scientists’ field mobility by focusing on an author’s self-citation network, and the co-authorships and keywords in self-citing articles. Contrary to much previous literature on self-citations, we will show that author’s self-citation patterns reveal important information on the development and emergence of new research topics over time. More specifically, we will discuss self-citations as a means to detect scientists’ field mobility. We introduc...
54 CitationsSource
I propose the index h, defined as the number of papers with citation number ≥h, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher.
5,164 CitationsSource
57 CitationsSource
#1Apoor S. Gami (Mayo Clinic)H-Index: 34
#2Victor M. MontoriH-Index: 112
Last. R. Brian Haynes (McMaster University)H-Index: 76
view all 4 authors...
Background: Author self-citation is the practice of citing one9s previous publications in a new publication. Its extent is unknown. We studied author self-citation, choosing the major clinical field of diabetes mellitus to represent the general medical literature. Methods: We identified every article about diabetes mellitus in 170 hand-searched clinical journals published in 2000. For every article, we recorded the bibliographic citation and publication type (original or review article) and asse...
77 CitationsSource
Cited By3
#1Tehmina Amjad (IIUI: International Islamic University, Islamabad)H-Index: 10
#2Yusra Rehmat (IIUI: International Islamic University, Islamabad)
Last. Rabeeh Ayaz Abbasi (QAU: Quaid-i-Azam University)H-Index: 10
view all 4 authors...
In bibliometric and scientometric research, the quantitative assessment of scientific impact has boomed over the past few decades. Citations, being playing a major role in enhancing the impact of researchers, have become a very significant part of a plethora of new techniques for measuring scientific impact. Self-citations, though can be used genuinely to credit someone’s own work, can play a significant role in artificial manipulation of scientific impact. In this research, we study the impact ...
#1Daphne R. Raban (University of Haifa)H-Index: 14
#2Avishag Gordon (University of Haifa)H-Index: 7
In this study the evolution of Big Data (BD) and Data Science (DS) literatures and the relationship between the two are analyzed by bibliometric indicators that help establish the course taken by publications on these research areas before and after forming concepts. We observe a surge in BD publications along a gradual increase in DS publications. Interestingly, a new publications course emerges combining the BD and DS concepts. We evaluate the three literature streams using various bibliometri...
#1Francisco González-Sala (University of Valencia)H-Index: 3
#2Julia Osca-LluchH-Index: 3
Last. Julia Haba-Osca (University of Valencia)H-Index: 2
view all 3 authors...
2 CitationsSource