Self-citation and its impact on research evaluation: Literature review. Part I

TL;DR

This literature review examines the role, measures, and impact of self-citation in research evaluation, highlighting its effects on individual researchers and the integrity of bibliometric indicators.

Contribution

It introduces a generalized definition of self-citation, discusses various types, and analyzes how bibliometric tools address potential manipulation through self-citations.

Findings

Excessive self-citation is considered pathological.

Self-citation impacts are more significant for individual researchers than large units.

Top scientists and institutions receive most citations from outside sources.

Abstract

This review summarizes papers which analyze impact of self-citation on research evaluation. We introduce a generalized definition of self-citation and its variants: author, institutional, country, journal, discipline, publisher self-citation. Formulae of the basic self-citation measures are given, namely self-citing and self-cited rates. World literature on author, institutional, country and journal self-citation is studied in more detail. Current views on the role and impact of self-citation are compiled and analyzed. It is found that there is a general consensus on some points: (a) pathological is as excessive self-citation so its total absence; (b) self-citation has low impact on large science units but may be critical for analysis of individual researchers; (c) share of self-citations is generally higher for units with low bibliometric performance, while top scientists, institutions, journals receive the majority of their citations from outside. This review also considers how bibliometric instruments and databases respond to challenge of possible manipulation by self-citations and how they correct bibliometric indicators calculated by them. The first part of the review presented here deals with the fundamental terms and definitions, and the most discussed and studied type of the self-citation, author self-citation. The paper was funded by RFBR, project number 20-111-50209