What is coercive citation in the context of academic publishing?

Coercive citation is an unethical practice in academic publishing where a journal editor or referee pressures an author to include additional citations in their manuscript before it will be accepted for publication. These forced citations are often to papers published within the editor's own journal and may be considered spurious or irrelevant by the author.

What is the primary goal of engaging in coercive citation?

The primary goal of coercive citation is to artificially inflate a journal's impact factor. A higher impact factor is often seen as a measure of prestige and can attract more submissions and enhance the journal's reputation within the academic community.

How does coercive citation relate to the standard peer review process?

While peer review is a standard part of academic publishing intended to improve the quality of a manuscript, coercive citation twists this process. Instead of suggesting relevant citations for improvement, editors or referees demand the inclusion of specific, often irrelevant, citations from their own journal, using the threat of rejection.

What was the finding of the 2012 survey regarding the prevalence of coercive citation?

A 2012 survey of academics in economics, sociology, psychology, and business disciplines found that approximately 20% of respondents had experienced coercive citation incidents. The survey also indicated that a significant majority, 86%, regarded the practice as unethical.

Which academic disciplines were surveyed in the 2012 study on coercive citation, and where was it found to be most prevalent?

The 2012 survey included academics in economics, sociology, psychology, and various business disciplines. The study found that coercive citation was significantly more prevalent in business disciplines (such as marketing, management, or finance) compared to economics journals. Coercion in psychology and sociology was found to be less prevalent than in economics.

What is the definition of a journal's impact factor (IF)?

The impact factor (IF) of a journal is a metric that quantifies the average number of times articles published in that journal are cited by other academic publications within a given period. It was initially developed in the 1950s as a tool to help rank scientific journals.

Can the impact factor be a positive metric for academic journals?

Yes, the impact factor can serve a positive purpose by incentivizing journal editors to enhance their publications through the inclusion of high-quality scientific research. For example, prestigious journals like Nature and Science have high impact factors, and even specialized journals in fields like cognitive science can have respectable impact factors around 3.

What criticisms have been raised regarding the use of impact factors?

Impact factors have become a source of controversy. Criticisms include the potential for them to create a 'marketplace' where scientific success is rewarded solely with attention, and concerns about editors manipulating citation counts to artificially boost their journal's standing. One article famously described it as 'the number that's devouring science'.

What specific criteria indicate a request might be coercive citation?

Requests for additional citations are considered coercive if they provide no indication that the manuscript was initially lacking proper citations, make no suggestion as to a specific body of work that requires review, and specifically direct authors to add citations only from the editor's own journal.

What is the potential consequence of coercive citation on a journal's impact factor?

While intended to inflate the impact factor, coercive citation can be risky. If discovered, it can damage the journal's reputation and potentially lead to its temporary exclusion from important lists like Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports, which could ultimately reduce its impact factor.

Is all self-citation considered improper or coercive?

No, not all self-citation is improper or coercive. Self-citation is a natural part of academic discourse when an author's subsequent work builds upon their previous research or when citing foundational papers within a specific field. The issue arises when it is mandated or excessive without clear relevance.

What types of publishers are more associated with coercive citation practices?

Research indicates that journals published by commercial, for-profit companies show a significantly greater use of coercive tactics compared to journals from university presses. Journals published by academic societies also demonstrated a higher likelihood of coercion than those from university presses.

Which specific commercial publisher was identified as having multiple top-offending journals in the context of coercive citation?

The research identified Elsevier as a commercial publishing house where five of the top ten journals implicated in coercive citation practices originated.

Is there a correlation between a journal's ranking and the practice of coercive citation?

Surprisingly, studies suggest a correlation where more highly ranked journals are actually more likely to engage in coercive citation. This could be because some top journals use coercion to maintain their high position, or they may have achieved that position through such practices.

Who are the primary targets of coercive citation requests?

Coercive citation primarily targets younger researchers with less senior academic ranks and papers with a smaller number of authors. This is likely because these individuals and works may be perceived as more vulnerable and less likely to challenge the editor's demands, thus maximizing the effect on the journal's impact factor.

Are authors from certain linguistic backgrounds more likely to be subjected to coercive citation?

Yes, the study found that authors from non-English speaking countries were more likely to be targeted for coercive citation requests.

What is the 'Leukemia' journal example and why is it significant?

The 'Leukemia' journal example illustrates a blatant coercive citation request where an editor explicitly asked an author to increase their citations to articles published in 'Leukemia' because the initial submission only cited it once among 42 references. This highlights the direct pressure applied to inflate journal-specific citations.

What is the potential risk to a journal's reputation if coercive citation practices are exposed?

Exposing coercive citation practices can significantly damage a journal's reputation among academics. This reputational harm can undermine the very prestige the journal sought to build through inflating its impact factor.

What is the 'shadow market' concept mentioned in relation to citation counts?

Georg Franck, in a 1999 essay, warned of a potential 'shadow market' in scientific communication where journal editors might inflate citation counts by mandating spurious references. This concept foreshadowed the practice of coercive citation as a means to manipulate journal metrics.

What is the significance of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Leiden Manifesto in the context of citation metrics?

While not detailed in the provided text, DORA and the Leiden Manifesto are mentioned in the sidebar as related initiatives concerning academic journal publishing reform. They generally advocate for better practices in research assessment and the use of citation metrics, implicitly addressing issues like coercive citation.

What is altmetrics, and how does it relate to traditional citation metrics?

Altmetrics, mentioned in the sidebar, refers to alternative metrics used to measure the impact and attention research receives, often beyond traditional academic citations. This can include social media mentions, downloads, and news coverage. It represents a broader approach to evaluating research impact, potentially offering alternatives to metrics susceptible to manipulation like impact factors.

What is bibliometrics?

Bibliometrics is the statistical analysis of written publications, including citation analysis. It is a broader field that encompasses the study and measurement of scholarly literature, including metrics like impact factors and citation counts, and is relevant to understanding the context of coercive citation.

What is a citation cartel?

A citation cartel is a group of authors who agree to cite each other's work excessively, often regardless of relevance, to artificially boost their citation counts and perceived impact. This is related to coercive citation as both involve manipulation of citation practices for reputational gain.

How does Goodhart's Law relate to the issue of coercive citation?

Goodhart's Law states that 'When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.' In the context of coercive citation, the impact factor, when treated as the primary target for journal success, becomes susceptible to manipulation, thus ceasing to be a reliable indicator of journal quality or influence.

What is the role of Elsevier in the context of coercive citation?

Elsevier, a major commercial publisher, was identified in a study as publishing five of the top ten journals implicated in coercive citation practices. This suggests a potential systemic issue within some commercial publishing houses.

What is the difference between article-level metrics and journal-level metrics like impact factor?

Article-level metrics assess the impact and reach of individual research papers, whereas journal-level metrics, such as the impact factor, evaluate the average performance of all papers published within a specific journal. Coercive citation directly targets journal-level metrics.

What is the 'Ingelfinger rule' mentioned in the academic publishing navbox?

The Ingelfinger rule, mentioned in the context of academic publishing, traditionally refers to the policy of many medical journals not publishing research that has already been published elsewhere, including in preliminary form. While not directly about citation manipulation, it relates to editorial policies that shape publication practices.

What does the term 'least publishable unit' refer to in academic publishing?

The 'least publishable unit' (LPU) refers to the practice of dividing research findings into the smallest possible pieces to maximize the number of publications. This concept, found in the academic publishing navbox, relates to pressures on researchers to publish frequently, which can indirectly intersect with citation practices.

What is the 'serials crisis' in academic publishing?

The 'serials crisis' refers to the escalating cost of journal subscriptions, particularly for academic libraries, which has made it difficult to afford the necessary resources. This issue is linked to the broader landscape of academic publishing economics and practices.

What is the purpose of a 'preprint' in academic publishing?

A preprint is a version of a scholarly paper that precedes formal peer review and publication in a journal. Preprints allow researchers to share their findings quickly and widely, and they are listed in the 'Versioning' section of the academic publishing navbox.

What is a 'retraction' in academic publishing?

A retraction is the process by which a published academic paper is formally withdrawn by the journal due to significant errors, plagiarism, or ethical concerns. It is listed under 'Versioning' in the academic publishing navbox.

How do initiatives like I4OC (Initiative for Open Citations) relate to coercive citation?

I4OC, mentioned under 'Citation' in the sidebar, promotes the open availability of citation data. By making citation information more accessible and transparent, such initiatives can help in identifying and combating manipulative practices like coercive citation, as they allow for independent analysis of citation patterns.

What is the Leiden Manifesto, and how does it address citation practices?

The Leiden Manifesto provides principles and best practices for evaluating research and researchers, emphasizing responsible use of citation metrics. It aims to discourage the over-reliance on simplistic metrics like impact factors and encourages a more nuanced assessment, indirectly countering practices like coercive citation.

What are 'altmetrics' and how do they differ from traditional citation metrics?

Altmetrics, or alternative metrics, measure the attention research receives beyond traditional academic citations. This includes tracking mentions in social media, news outlets, policy documents, and other online sources. They offer a broader perspective on research impact compared to citation counts alone.

What is the 'g-index' in the context of author-level metrics?

The g-index is a bibliometric indicator used to measure the productivity and citation impact of a scholar. It is one of several author-level metrics designed to assess an individual researcher's contribution, as listed in the sidebar.

What is the 'Erdos number' and why is it relevant to academic citation?

The Erdos number is a measure of the 'collaborative distance' between a researcher and the highly prolific mathematician Paul Erdos, based on chains of co-authorship. It is listed under author-level metrics and serves as an example of a citation-based network metric, albeit one focused on collaboration rather than direct citation impact.

What is bibliographic coupling?

Bibliographic coupling is a method used in bibliometrics where two documents are considered similar if they cite the same references. It's a way to identify related research papers based on shared citation patterns.

What is a citation cartel?

A citation cartel is an unethical practice where a group of authors agree to cite each other's work excessively, regardless of relevance, to artificially inflate their citation counts and perceived impact. This is a form of citation manipulation.

What is the purpose of the 'See also' section in the article?

The 'See also' section provides links to related topics that offer further context or delve into related concepts. For the 'Coercive citation' article, it includes links to 'Impact factor criticism,' 'Conflicts of interest in academic publishing,' and 'Goodhart's law,' among others, helping readers explore the broader issues surrounding citation practices.

What is the 'Science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators' mentioned in the article?

This refers to large-scale databases that compile standardized citation indicators for authors across various scientific disciplines. These databases aim to provide a consistent way to assess author impact, and are listed under author-level metrics.

What is the 'Kardashian index' in the context of citation metrics?

The Kardashian index is mentioned as an author-level metric. While not explicitly defined in the text, its inclusion alongside metrics like the h-index suggests it is another measure related to academic output or influence, possibly with a satirical or critical undertone given the name.

What is the 'composite index' mentioned under author-level metrics?

A composite index, in the context of author-level metrics, likely refers to a metric that combines multiple indicators to provide a single score for evaluating a researcher's impact or productivity. It is listed alongside other author-level metrics.

What is the 'Eigenfactor' score?

The Eigenfactor is a proprietary metric that measures the total importance of a journal, considering both the quantity and the source of citations. It is listed under author-level metrics, though it primarily functions as a journal-level metric.

What is the 'h-index'?

The h-index is a widely used bibliometric indicator that measures both the productivity and citation impact of a researcher's publications. An author has an h-index of 'h' if 'h' of their publications have been cited at least 'h' times each, and the other publications have received no more than 'h' citations.

What is the 'g-index'?

The g-index is another bibliometric measure proposed to evaluate the citation impact of scholars. It ranks papers by citation count and considers the sum of citations for the top-ranked papers, aiming to give more weight to highly cited works than the h-index.

What is the 'Science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators'?

These are comprehensive databases that collect and standardize citation data for researchers across numerous scientific fields. They aim to provide a consistent basis for evaluating scholarly impact, as noted under author-level metrics.

What is the 'Leiden Manifesto' in relation to research assessment?

The Leiden Manifesto provides a set of principles for responsible research evaluation, emphasizing the need for robust citation practices and cautioning against the misuse of metrics like journal impact factors. It is presented as part of the broader discussion on academic publishing reform.

What is the 'Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC)'?

I4OC is an initiative that encourages the open sharing of structured citation data. Making citation data openly available can facilitate better analysis and understanding of citation practices, potentially helping to identify and address issues like coercive citation.

What is the potential consequence for journals that engage in coercive citation practices?

Journals engaging in coercive citation risk damaging their reputation and may face temporary exclusion from influential lists like Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports, which could negatively impact their perceived standing and potentially their actual impact factor.

Coercive Citation Wiki: Academic Integrity Under Pressure: The Coercive Citation Phenomenon

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

The Nature of Coercive Citation

Definition

Coercive citation is an academic publishing practice where an editor or referee of a scientific or academic journal compels an author to include spurious citations within their manuscript before agreeing to publication. This practice is primarily undertaken to artificially inflate the journal's impact factor, thereby enhancing its perceived scientific prestige and reputation.^[1]

Prevalence

While manipulation of impact factors and self-citation has long been discouraged in academic circles, a 2012 survey revealed that approximately 20% of academics across economics, sociology, psychology, and various business disciplines reported experiencing coercive citation incidents. Individual cases have also been documented in other fields.^[2]^[3]

The Impact Factor Landscape

Understanding Impact Factor

The Impact Factor (IF) is a bibliometric measure quantifying the average frequency with which articles in a journal have been cited over a specific period. Developed in the 1950s, it initially served as a tool for journal ranking. Today, in many disciplines, the IF significantly influences a journal's perceived prestige and the perceived value of its published research.^[4]

Controversy and Criticism

While the IF can reasonably incentivize editors to publish high-quality science, its widespread use has generated considerable controversy. Critics argue that it fosters a "vanity fair" environment where scientific success is equated with attention, potentially leading to a "shadow market" of manipulated citation counts. Some have described it as "the number that's devouring science."^[6]^[4]

Defining the Unethical Practice

Beyond Standard Peer Review

During the standard peer review process, editors may request citation expansions to enhance a manuscript's completeness. Coercive citation, however, deviates significantly by constituting an unethical business practice. It specifically involves editors requesting authors to add citations to papers published within the editor's own journal, often including references that the author deems irrelevant or spurious.^[5]

Key Characteristics

Requests indicative of coercive citation typically exhibit the following traits:^[2]

No prior indication that the manuscript's citations were insufficient.
No specific suggestions regarding a relevant body of work to review.
A directive to include citations exclusively from the editor's journal.

An illustrative example involved an editor stating: "you cite Leukemia [once in 42 references]. Consequently, we kindly ask you to add references of articles published in Leukemia to your present article."^[3]^[2] This implicitly conveys a message: "add citations or risk rejection."^[2]

Impact and Consequences

The direct consequence of coercive citation is the artificial inflation of a journal's impact factor. The effect can be substantial; in one analysis, removing self-citations caused a journal's impact factor to drop from 2.731 to 0.748. It is important to distinguish this from legitimate self-citation, which is not inherently improper.^[7]

Empirical Findings and Patterns

Survey Data Insights

A comprehensive 2012 survey by Wilhite and Fong, encompassing 6,700 academics across economics, sociology, psychology, and business disciplines, investigated coercive citation practices. The findings indicated that 86% of respondents regarded the practice as unethical, and approximately one in five reported experiencing such incidents.^[2]

Disciplinary and Publisher Variations

The survey revealed significant variations in coercion prevalence across disciplines, with journals in business fields exhibiting higher rates than economics journals, and psychology and sociology showing lower or comparable rates. Furthermore, journals published by commercial, for-profit companies demonstrated significantly more coercive tactics than those from university presses. Notably, five of the top ten identified offenders were associated with Elsevier.^[2]

Journal Ranking and Target Demographics

Surprisingly, the research suggested that more highly ranked journals were more likely to engage in coercive citation, raising concerns about whether journals use this practice to maintain their position or if coercion contributes to their high standing. The practice disproportionately targets younger researchers, those with less senior academic ranks, papers with fewer authors, and authors from non-English speaking countries.^[2]^[9]

Risks and Repercussions

Reputational Damage

Engaging in coercive citation poses significant risks to a journal's reputation within the academic community. Such practices undermine the perceived integrity of the publication process and can erode trust among researchers and institutions.^[8]

Exclusion from Rankings

Journals employing coercive citation tactics risk temporary exclusion from influential citation databases, such as Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports (JCR). This exclusion can severely diminish a journal's visibility and perceived value, directly counteracting the intended benefit of inflating its impact factor.^[5]

The Paradoxical Effect

While intended to boost impact factors, coercive citation can paradoxically harm a journal's standing. The practice may lead to a decrease in the journal's actual impact factor if self-citations are identified and discounted. Furthermore, the ethical implications can lead to a loss of credibility, potentially reducing genuine citations and readership in the long term.^[7]

Related Concepts

Citation Cartels

Similar to coercive citation, citation cartels involve groups of authors or journals colluding to artificially inflate citation counts, often through reciprocal citation agreements. This practice undermines the integrity of citation metrics.

Conflicts of Interest

Coercive citation represents a significant conflict of interest, where the personal or institutional gain of the journal editor (higher impact factor) is prioritized over the objective evaluation of the manuscript and the integrity of the scientific record.

Goodhart's Law

This principle, often relevant in metrics-driven fields, states that "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." Coercive citation exemplifies this by demonstrating how the pursuit of a specific metric (impact factor) can lead to its distortion and loss of validity.

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio

Click here to open the "Coercive Citation" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about coercive_citation while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.

Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

alabama state hornets football

References

R. Monastersky, "The number thatâs devouring science." Chron. Higher Educ. (14 October 2005)

Marco Pagano and Josef Zechner: "Review of Finance Report by the Managing Editors" Stockholm, 17 August 2011. Retrieved 28 May 2012.

A full list of references for this article are available at the Coercive citation Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.

This is not professional advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for professional consultation regarding academic publishing ethics, research integrity, or legal matters. Always refer to official guidelines and consult with qualified experts for specific situations.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.

Academic Integrity Under Pressure

💡 Dive in with Flashcard Learning! 💡

The Nature of Coercive Citation ⚖️

📜 Definition

📈 Prevalence

The Impact Factor Landscape 📈

📊 Understanding Impact Factor

❓ Controversy and Criticism

Defining the Unethical Practice 📜

🧐 Beyond Standard Peer Review

✍️ Key Characteristics

⚖️ Impact and Consequences

Empirical Findings and Patterns 📊

🔬 Survey Data Insights

🌍 Disciplinary and Publisher Variations

⭐ Journal Ranking and Target Demographics

Risks and Repercussions ⚠️

📉 Reputational Damage

🚫 Exclusion from Rankings

🤔 The Paradoxical Effect

Related Concepts 🔗

🤝 Citation Cartels

⚖️ Conflicts of Interest

⚖️ Goodhart's Law

Teacher's Corner 🧑‍🏫

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

True or False? 🤔

❓ Test Your Knowledge! ❓

Gamer's Corner 🎮

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Explore More Topics

📜 Discover other topics to study!

References

📜 References

Feedback & Support 👍

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer ❗

📜 Important Notice

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

The Nature of Coercive Citation

Definition

Prevalence

The Impact Factor Landscape

Understanding Impact Factor

Controversy and Criticism

Defining the Unethical Practice

Beyond Standard Peer Review

Key Characteristics

Impact and Consequences

Empirical Findings and Patterns

Survey Data Insights

Disciplinary and Publisher Variations

Journal Ranking and Target Demographics

Risks and Repercussions

Reputational Damage

Exclusion from Rankings

The Paradoxical Effect

Related Concepts

Citation Cartels

Conflicts of Interest

Goodhart's Law

Teacher's Corner

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Discover other topics to study!

References

Feedback & Support

Disclaimer

Important Notice