Abstract
The issue of self-citation has received much attention in academia. Widely used and accessible tools such as Google Scholar do not provide information about self-citations. Therefore, a simple and practical back-of-the-envelope test for identifying researchers with strategic self-citations is proposed without access to self-citation information. It is shown that the h-index squared divided by the number of citations predicts self-citations. The test is simple to apply based on Google Scholar author profiles. Bibliometric data for more than 100,000 researchers worldwide were used to assess the proposed test. Test values of 0.35 or more indicate high ratios of self-citation while test values below 0.2 suggest low ratios of self-citations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Aksnes, D. W. (2003). A macro study of self-citation. Scientometrics,56(2), 235–246.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2005). Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics,65(3), 391–392.
Falagas, M. E., & Kavvadia, P. (2006). “Eigenlob”: self-citation in biomedical journals. FASEB J,20(8), 1039–1042.
García-Pérez, M. A. (2010). Accuracy and completeness of publication and citation records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: a case study for the computation of h indices in psychology. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol,61(10), 2070–2085.
Gehanno, J. F., Rollin, L., & Darmoni, S. (2013). Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews. BMC Med Inf Decis Mak,13(1), 7.
Gianoli, E., & Molina-Montenegro, M. A. (2009). Insights into the relationship between the h-index and self-citations. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol,60(6), 1283–1285.
Hartley, J. (2012). To cite or not to cite: author self-citations and the impact factor. Scientometrics,92(2), 313–317.
Harzing, A. W. (2010). The publish or perish book. London: Tarma Software Research Pty Limited.
Haugen, K. K., & Sandnes, F. E. (2016). The new Norwegian incentive system for publication: from bad to worse. Scientometrics,109(2), 1299–1306.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,102(46), 16569–16572.
Ioannidis, J. P., Baas, J., Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2019). A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field. PLoS Biol,17(8), e3000384.
Medoff, M. H. (2006). The efficiency of self-citations in economics. Scientometrics,69(1), 69–84.
Sandnes, F. E. (2018). Do Norwegian academics who publish more earn higher salaries? Scientometrics,115(1), 263–281.
Sandnes, F. E., & Grønli, T. M. (2018). Thirty years of NIK: A bibliometric study of pa-per impact and changes in publication patterns. In: Proceedings of Norsk Informatikk-konferanse, NISK Stiftelsen, BIBSYS Open Journal System. https://ojs.bibsys.no/index.php/NIK/article/view/496. Accessed 20 Feb 2020.
Sandnes, F. E., & Brevik, E. (2019). Twenty-five years of NOKOBIT: a bibliometric study of impact. In: Proceedings of the annual NOKOBIT conference. NISK Stiftelsen, BIBSYS Open Journal System, 27(1). https://ojs.bibsys.no/index.php/Nokobit/article/view/661. Accessed 20 Feb 2020.
Van Noorden, R., & Singh, C. D. (2019). Hundreds of extreme self-citing scientists revealed in new database. Nature,572(7771), 578.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sandnes, F.E. A simple back-of-the-envelope test for self-citations using Google Scholar author profiles. Scientometrics 124, 1685–1689 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03521-6
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03521-6