Self-citation is attracting wide attention in citation analysis research and research evaluation practice. However, the academic community’s views on self-citation are not uniform. If the number of self-citations should be calculated, it is critical to calculate it accurately and unambiguously. However, based on a case study of thirty papers published during 2014 and 2020 by the corresponding author of the study, we find that the numbers of self-citations identified through the automatic identification tools provided by Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection are confusing and inconsistent. We also put forward corresponding improvement suggestions to the stakeholders including these two authoritative bibliographic database providers at the end of this article.

中文翻译：

---

相同但不同：通过 Scopus 和 Web of Science 核心合集识别的自引

自引在引文分析研究和研究评价实践中受到广泛关注。然而，学术界对自引的看法并不统一。如果要计算自引次数，关键是要准确无误地计算。然而，基于该研究通讯作者在 2014 年和 2020 年发表的 30 篇论文的案例研究，我们发现通过 Scopus 和 Web of Science Core Collection 提供的自动识别工具识别的自引数量令人困惑，不一致。我们还在文末向包括这两家权威书目数据库提供商在内的利益相关者提出了相应的改进建议。