gpntbНаучные и технические библиотекиScientific and Technical Libraries1027-36892686-8601Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology10.33186/1027-3689-2022-2-49-70gpntb-899Research ArticleПРОБЛЕМЫ ИНФОРМАЦИОННОГО ОБЩЕСТВАPROBLEMS OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETYСамоцитирование и его влияние на оценку научной деятельности: обзор литературы. Часть ISelf-citation and its impact on scientific workflow assessment: The review of publications. Part IПисляковВ. В.PislyakovV. V.

Писляков Владимир Владимирович – канд. физ.-мат. наук, заместитель директора библиотеки Национального исследовательского университета «Высшая школа экономики»; член редколлегии «Journal of Informetrics»

Москва

Vladimir V. Pislyakov – Cand.  Sc. (Physics & Mathematics), Deputy Director, Library, Higher School of Economics National Research University; Editorial Board Member, Journal of Informetrics

Moscow

pislyakov@hse.ruНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»РоссияHigher School of Economics National Research UniversityRussian Federation202215032022024970Copyright © Писляков В.В., 20222022Писляков В.В.Pislyakov V.V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://ntb.gpntb.ru/jour/article/view/899

Представлен обзор литературы, посвящённой влиянию самоцитирования и возникающим от этого возможным искажениям при библиометрическом анализе. Вводится обобщённое определение самоцитирования и его частных вариантов: авторского, институционального, странового, журнального, дисциплинарного, издательского. Приведены формулы основных метрик самоцитирования – коэффициентов самоцитирования и самоцитируемости. Подробно рассмотрена мировая литература по авторскому, институциональному, страновому и журнальному самоцитированию. Обобщены текущие взгляды на роль и влияние самоцитирования при оценке научной деятельности. При аналитическом рассмотрении статей, посвящённых самоцитированию, выясняется, что у исследователей существует консенсус по ряду позиций, например: а) патологией является как гипертрофированное самоцитирование, так и его отсутствие; б) самоцитирование мало влияет на оценку крупных научных единиц, но может быть критическим при анализе отдельных учёных; в) влияние самоцитирования наиболее выражено у научных единиц со слабыми библиометрическими показателями, в то время как топовые учёные, организации, журналы и др. получают наибольшее число ссылок извне. Рассмотрено реагирование самих библиометрических инструментов и баз данных с целью корректировки индикаторов в случае манипулирования самоцитированием.

Представленная первая часть обзора посвящена определению основных понятий и терминов, а также рассмотрению наиболее обсуждаемого и распространённого типа самоцитирования – авторского.

The author reviews publications on the problem of self-citation and resulting mispresentations at the stage bibliometric analysis. He introduces the definition of self-citation and its special cases, i. e. author’s, institutional, publisher’s and disciplinary. The formulas for general self-citation metrics, i. e. self-citation and self-citedness coefficients, are provided. The global publications on author’s, institutional, national and journal self-citation are reviewed thoroughly. The current concepts of the role and impact of self-citation on scientific activity assessment are generalized. On the basis of his analytical review, the author argues that the researchers obtain consensus on several aspects, e. g.: а) excessive and absent self-citation are both seen as pathologies; в) self-citation has insignificant impact on large research entities though this influence can be critical when analyzing contributions by individual authors; с) self-citation impact is well-expressed for scientific entities with weak bibliometric indicators, while the top scientists, organizations, journals, etc., get most of external links. The author examines the response of bibliometric indicators and databases to self-citation manipulations to adjust the indicators.

Part I of the review is intended to define the basic concepts and terms and to examine the most popular author’s self-citation.

самоцитированиебиблиометрический анализоценка научной деятельностиимпакт-факторself-citationbibliometric analysisassessment of scientific activityimpact factorСтатья подготовлена при финансовой поддержке РФФИ в рамках научного проекта № 20-111-50209.The article is prepared through the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research within the Project No. 20-111-50209.ReferencesMay K. O. Abuses of Citation Indexing // Science. 1967. Vol. 156 (3777). P. 890– 892. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.156.3777.890-a.May K. O. Abuses of Citation Indexing // Science. 1967. Vol. 156 (3777). P. 890–892. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.156.3777.890-a.Cawkell A. E. Science Citation Index // Nature. 1970. Vol. 228 (5273). P. 789–790. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/228789b0.Cawkell A. E. Science Citation Index // Nature. 1970. Vol. 228 (5273). P. 789–790. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/228789b0Martino J. P. Citation indexing for research and development management // IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. – 1971. – Vol. EM-18 (4). P. 146–151. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.1971.6448353.Martino J. P. Citation indexing for research and development management // IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. – 1971. – Vol. EM-18 (4). P. 146–151. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.1971.6448353.Myers C. R. Journal citations and scientific eminence in contemporary psychology // American Psychologist. 1970. Vol. 25 (11). P. 1041–1048. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030149.Myers C. R. Journal citations and scientific eminence in contemporary psychology // American Psychologist. 1970. Vol. 25 (11). P. 1041–1048. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030149.Bar-Ilan J. Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century – A review // Journal of Informetrics. 2008. Vol. 2 (1). P. 1–52. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.11.001.Bar-Ilan J. Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century – A review // Journal of Informetrics. 2008. Vol. 2 (1). P. 1–52. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.11.001.Waltman L. A review of the literature on citation impact indicators // Journal of Informetrics. 2016. Vol. 10 (2). P. 365–391. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007.Waltman L. A review of the literature on citation impact indicators // Journal of Informetrics. 2016. Vol. 10 (2). P. 365–391. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007.Egghe L., Rousseau R. Introduction to Informetrics: Quantitative Methods in Library, Documentation and Information Science. Amsterdam e. a.: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990. URL: http://eprints.rclis.org/6011/ (дата обращения: 27.06.2021).Egghe L., Rousseau R. Introduction to Informetrics: Quantitative Methods in Library, Documentation and Information Science. Amsterdam e. a.: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990. URL: http://eprints.rclis.org/6011/ (data obrashcheniya: 27.06.2021).Glänzel W., Debackere K., Thijs B., Schubert A. A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 67 (2). P. 263–277. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9.Glänzel W., Debackere K., Thijs B., Schubert A. A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 67 (2). P. 263–277. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9.Szomszor M., Pendlebury D. A., Adams J. How much is too much? The difference between research influence and self-citation excess // Scientometrics. 2020. Vol. 123 (2). P. 1119–1147. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5.Szomszor M., Pendlebury D. A., Adams J. How much is too much? The difference between research influence and self-citation excess // Scientometrics. 2020. Vol. 123 (2). P. 1119–1147. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5.Westbrook J. H. Identifying Significant Research // Science. 1960. Vol. 132 (3435). P. 1229–1234. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.132.3435.1229Westbrook J. H. Identifying Significant Research // Science. 1960. Vol. 132 (3435). P. 1229–1234. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.132.3435.1229.Tagliacozzo R. Self-citations in Scientific Literature // Journal of Documentation. 1977. Vol. 33 (4). P. 251–265. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026644.Tagliacozzo R. Self-citations in Scientific Literature // Journal of Documentation. 1977. Vol. 33 (4). P. 251–265. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026644Wallmark J. T., Eckerstein S., Langered B., Holmqvist H. E. S. Increase in Efficiency with Size of Research Teams // IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 1973. Vol. EM-20 (3). P. 80–86. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.1973.6448434.Wallmark J. T., Eckerstein S., Langered B., Holmqvist H. E. S. Increase in Efficiency with Size of Research Teams // IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 1973. Vol. EM-20 (3). P. 80–86. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.1973.6448434.Moed H. F., Burger W. J. M., Frankfort J. G., van Raan A. F. J. A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement // Scientometrics. 1985. Vol. 8 (3–4). P. 149–159. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016933.Moed H. F., Burger W. J. M., Frankfort J. G., van Raan A. F. J. A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement // Scientometrics. 1985. Vol. 8 (3–4). P. 149–159. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016933.Moed H. F., Burger W. J. M., Frankfort J. G., Van Raan A. F. J. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance // Research Policy. 1985. Vol. 14 (3). P. 131–149. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(85)90012-5.Moed H. F., Burger W. J. M., Frankfort J. G., Van Raan A. F. J. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance // Research Policy. 1985. Vol. 14 (3). P. 131–149. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(85)90012-5.Minasny B., Hartemink A. E., McBratney A. Individual, country, and journal self-citation in soil science // Geoderma. 2010. Vol. 155 (3–4). P. 434-438. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.12.003.Minasny B., Hartemink A. E., McBratney A. Individual, country, and journal self-citation in soil science // Geoderma. 2010. Vol. 155 (3–4). P. 434–438. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.12.003Shehatta I., Al-Rubaish A. M. Impact of country self-citations on bibliometric indicators and ranking of most productive countries // Scientometrics. 2019. Vol. 120 (2). P. 775–791. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03139-3.Shehatta I., Al-Rubaish A. M. Impact of country self-citations on bibliometric indicators and ranking of most productive countries // Scientometrics. 2019. Vol. 120 (2). P. 775–791. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03139-3.Raisig L. M. World Biomedical Journals, 1951–60: A Study of the Relative Significance of 1,388 Titles Indexed in Current List of Medical Literature // Bulletin of the Medical Library Association. 1966. Vol. 54 (2). P. 108–125.Raisig L. M. World Biomedical Journals, 1951–60: A Study of the Relative Significance of 1,388 Titles Indexed in Current List of Medical Literature // Bulletin of the Medical Library Association. 1966. Vol. 54 (2). P. 108–125.Earle P., Vickery B. Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations // Journal of Documentation. 1969. Vol. 25 (2). P. 123–141. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026468.Earle P., Vickery B. Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations // Journal of Documentation. 1969. Vol. 25 (2). P. 123–141. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026468.Narin F., Pinski G., Gee H. H. Structure of the Biomedical Literature // Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1976. Vol. 27 (1). P. 25–45. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630270104.Narin F., Pinski G., Gee H. H. Structure of the Biomedical Literature // Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1976. Vol. 27 (1). P. 25–45. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630270104Zhou Y. Self-citation and citation of top journal publishers and their interpretation in the journal-discipline context // Scientometrics. 2021. Vol. 126 (7). P. 6013–6040. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03995-y.Zhou Y. Self-citation and citation of top journal publishers and their interpretation in the journal-discipline context // Scientometrics. 2021. Vol. 126 (7). P. 6013–6040. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03995-yYitzhaki M. The “language preference” in sociology: Measures of “language self-citation”, “relative own-language preference indicator”, and “mutual use of languages” // Scientometrics. 1998. Vol. 41 (1–2). P. 243–254. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457981.Yitzhaki M. The “language preference” in sociology: Measures of “language self-citation”, “relative own-language preference indicator”, and “mutual use of languages” // Scientometrics. 1998. Vol. 41 (1–2). P. 243–254. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457981.Egghe L., Rousseau R., Yitzhaki M. The “own-language preference”: Measures of relative language self-citation // Scientometrics. 1999. Vol. 45 (2). P. 217–232. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458434.Egghe L., Rousseau R., Yitzhaki M. The “own-language preference”: Measures of relative language self-citation // Scientometrics. 1999. Vol. 45 (2). P. 217–232. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458434.Писляков В. В. Методы оценки научного знания по показателям цитирования // Социологич. журн. 2007. № 1. С. 128–140. URL: https://www.jour.fnisc.ru/index.php/socjour/article/view/934/888 (дата обращения: 27.06.2021).Pislyakov V. V. Metody otsenki nauchnogo znaniya po pokazatelyam tsitirovaniya // Sotsiologich. zhurn. 2007. № 1. S. 128–140. URL: https://www.jour.fnisc.ru/index.php/socjour/article/view/934/888 (data obrashcheniya: 27.06.2021).Писляков В. В. Библиометрические индикаторы в ресурсах компании Clarivate // Руководство по наукометрии: индикаторы развития науки и технологии, 2-е изд. / М. А. Акоев, В. А. Маркусова, О. В. Москалева, В. В. Писляков [под ред. М. А. Акоева]. Екатеринбург : изд-во Урал. ун-та, 2021. С. 177–220. URL: https://doi.org/10.15826/B978-5-7996-3154-3.Pislyakov V. V. Bibliometricheskie indikatory v resursah kompanii Clarivate // Rukovodstvo po naukometrii: indikatory razvitiya nauki i tehnologii, 2-e izd. / M. A. Akoev, V. A. Marcusova, O. V. Moskaleva, V. V. Pislyakov [pod red. M. A. Akoeva]. Ekaterinburg : izdvo Ural. un-ta, 2021. S. 177–220. URL: https://doi.org/10.15826/B978-5-7996-3154-3.Glänzel W., Thijs B., Schlemmer B. A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 59 (1). P. 63–77. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000013299.38210.74.Glänzel W., Thijs B., Schlemmer B. A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 59 (1). P. 63–77. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000013299.38210.74.Schubert A., Glänzel W., Thijs B. The weight of author self-citations. A fractional approach to self-citation counting // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 67 (3). P. 503–514. URL: https://doi.org/10.1556/Scient.67.2006.3.11Schubert A., Glänzel W., Thijs B. The weight of author self-citations. A fractional approach to self-citation counting // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 67 (3). P. 503–514. URL: https://doi.org/10.1556/Scient.67.2006.3.11.Rousseau R. Temporal differences in self-citation rates of scientific journals // Scientometrics. 1999. Vol. 44 (3). P. 521–531. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458493.Rousseau R. Temporal differences in self-citation rates of scientific journals // Scientometrics. 1999. Vol. 44 (3). P. 521–531. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458493.Rousseau R. Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues // Library Trends. 2002. Vol. 50 (3). P. 418–439. URL: https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/8418/librarytrendsv50i3i_opt.pdf (дата обращения: 27.06.2021).Rousseau R. Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues // Library Trends. 2002. Vol. 50 (3). P. 418–439. URL: https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/8418/librarytrendsv50i3i_opt.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 27.06.2021).Porter A. L. Citation analysis: Queries and caveats // Social Studies of Science. 1977. Vol. 7 (2). P. 257–267. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030631277700700207Porter A. L. Citation analysis: Queries and caveats // Social Studies of Science. 1977. Vol. 7 (2). P. 257–267. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030631277700700207.Porter A. L., Wolfle D. Utility of the Doctoral Dissertation // American Psychologist. 1975. Vol. 30 (11). P. 1054–1061. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.30.11.1054.Porter A. L., Wolfle D. Utility of the Doctoral Dissertation // American Psychologist. 1975. Vol. 30 (11). P. 1054–1061. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.30.11.1054.Meadows A. J. Communication in Science. London : Butterworths, 1974.Meadows A. J. Communication in Science. London : Butterworths, 1974.van Raan A. F. J. The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results: Some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations // Scientometrics. 1998. Vol. 42 (3). P. 423–428. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458380.van Raan A. F. J. The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results: Some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations // Scientometrics. 1998. Vol. 42 (3). P. 423–428. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458380.van Raan A F. J., van Leeuwen T. N. A Decade of Astronomy Research in the Netherlands. Research Report to the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Astronomy Division, NWO/ASTRON). Leiden : Centre for Science and Technology Studies, 1995.van Raan A F. J., van Leeuwen T. N. A Decade of Astronomy Research in the Netherlands. Research Report to the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Astronomy Division, NWO/ASTRON). Leiden : Centre for Science and Technology Studies, 1995.Herbertz H. Does it pay to cooperate? A bibliometric case study in molecular biology // Scientometrics. 1995. Vol. 33 (1). P. 117–122. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02020777.Herbertz H. Does it pay to cooperate? A bibliometric case study in molecular biology // Scientometrics. 1995. Vol. 33 (1). P. 117–122. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02020777.Aksnes D. W. A macro study of self-citation // Scientometrics. 2003. Vol. 56 (2). P. 235–246. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021919228368.Aksnes D. W. A macro study of self-citation // Scientometrics. 2003. Vol. 56 (2). P. 235–246. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021919228368.Glänzel W., Thijs B. The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric macro indicators // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 59 (3). P. 281–310. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000018535.99885.e9.Glänzel W., Thijs B. The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric macro indicators // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 59 (3). P. 281–310. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000018535.99885.e9.Thijs B., Glänzel W. The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric mesoindicators. The case of European universities // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 66 (1). P. 71–80. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0006-3Thijs B., Glänzel W. The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric mesoindicators. The case of European universities // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 66 (1). P. 71–80. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0006-3Glänzel W., Thijs B. Does co-authorship inflate the share of self-citations? // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 61 (3). P. 395–404. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000045117.13348.b1.Glänzel W., Thijs B. Does co-authorship inflate the share of self-citations? // Scientometrics. 2004. Vol. 61 (3). P. 395–404. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000045117.13348.b1.Scarpa F., Bianco V., Tagliafico L. A. The impact of the national assessment exercises on self-citation rate and publication venue: An empirical investigation on the engineering academic sector in Italy // Scientometrics. 2018. Vol. 117 (2). P. 997–1022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2913-5.Scarpa F., Bianco V., Tagliafico L. A. The impact of the national assessment exercises on self-citation rate and publication venue: An empirical investigation on the engineering academic sector in Italy // Scientometrics. 2018. Vol. 117 (2). P. 997–1022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2913-5Seeber M., Cattaneo M., Meoli M., Malighetti, P. Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions // Research Policy. 2019. Vol. 48 (2). P. 478–491. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.004.Seeber M., Cattaneo M., Meoli M., Malighetti, P. Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions // Research Policy. 2019. Vol. 48 (2). P. 478–491. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.004.Peroni S., Ciancarini P., Gangemi A., Nuzzolese A. G., Poggi F., Presutti V. The practice of self-citations: A longitudinal study // Scientometrics. 2020. Vol. 123 (1). P. 253– 282. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03397-6.Peroni S., Ciancarini P., Gangemi A., Nuzzolese A. G., Poggi F., Presutti V. The practice of self-citations: A longitudinal study // Scientometrics. 2020. Vol. 123 (1). P. 253–282. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03397-6Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Grilli L. The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior. URL: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.05358.pdf (дата обращения: 27.06.2021).Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Grilli L. The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior. URL: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.05358.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 27.06.2021).Hirsch J. E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005. Vol. 102 (46). P. 16569–16572.: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.Hirsch J. E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005. Vol. 102 (46). P. 16569–16572. URL: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.Flatt J. W., Blasimme A., Vayena E. Improving the measurement of scientific success by reporting a self-citation index // Publications. 2017. Vol. 5 (3). Art. no. 20. URL: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications5030020.Flatt J. W., Blasimme A., Vayena E. Improving the measurement of scientific success by reporting a self-citation index // Publications. 2017. Vol. 5 (3). Art. no. 20. URL: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications5030020

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.