See these discussions with criticism:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Petition_Stop_Tracking_Science/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Your_opinion_about_the_following_link/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_do_you_think_about_scientific_production_evaluation_indices_such_as_those_of_Hirsch_h_or_Google_Scholar_i10_or_others/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Research_Publications_Impact_factor_H-Index_I-Index_Is_these_words_becoming_root_cause_for_stress_nowadays_rather_than_Passionate/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_do_bibliometric_studies_get_so_much_attention_in_todays_world_of_academia/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_impacts_researchers_can_create_beyond_citations_and_how_to_create_them/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Death_of_impact_factor_system/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_Impact_factor_to_be_avoided_from_journal_metrices_soon/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Impact_Factor_why_did_it_take_so_long_to_bury_this_stupid_variable/1

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-there-something-wrong-with-the-impact-factor/1

See also this interesting paper with criticism of the current misuse of citation analysis: How scientometry is killing science, https://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/24/12/pdf/i1052-5173-24-12-44.pdf

Thank you Dr. Wolfgang R. Dick

I would very much happy if you send editorial note about it. I am research advisor from ZenToks Inc, India.

This editorial note will publish in my own journals.

The increasing dominance of repeated citations from collaborative research groups in science

"Co-authorship has become more common, yet most studies focus on paper-to-paper citation patterns, overlooking the role of group collaborations. Our study explores how research group structures influence citation patterns, using a Co-Authorship Citation Network (CACN) based on the SciSciNet dataset, which includes 134 million publications and over 1.5 billion citation links. As time progresses, repeated citations within groups become more pronounced, with a 30% higher rate of repeated citations in 2000 compared to 1950. Disruptive papers are cited repeatedly by fewer groups, while impactful papers attract citations from more groups. Additionally, fields like Physics and Geology show higher rates of repeated citations, while Political Science and Sociology exhibit broader citation behaviors. This research enables researchers, institutions, and publishers to better understand group citation behaviors and improve knowledge dissemination across disciplines."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1751157725000860

While this paper provides a theoretical foundation for understanding citation analyses and proposes strategies to reduce citation noise, further research is needed to translate these ideas into practice...

Citation accuracy, citation noise, and citation bias: A foundation of citation analysis

"Citation analysis is widely used in research evaluation to assess the impact of scientific papers. These analyses rest on the assumption that citation decisions by authors are accurate, representing flow of knowledge from cited to citing papers. However, in practice, researchers often cite for reasons other than attributing intellectual credit to previous research. Citations made for rhetorical reasons or without reading the cited work compromise the value of citations as instrument for research evaluation. Past research on threats to the accuracy of citations has mainly focused on citation bias as the primary concern. In this paper, we argue that citation noise - the undesirable variance in citation decisions - represents an equally critical but underexplored challenge in citation analysis. We define and differentiate two types of citation noise: citation level noise and citation pattern noise. Each type of noise is described in terms of how it arises and the specific ways it can undermine the validity of citation-based research assessments. By conceptually differing citation noise from citation accuracy and citation bias, we propose a framework for the foundation of citation analysis. We discuss strategies and interventions to minimize citation noise, aiming to improve the reliability and validity of citation analysis in research evaluation. We recommend that the current professional reform movement in research evaluation such as the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) pick up these strategies and interventions as an additional building block for careful, responsible use of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation."

Preprint Citation accuracy, citation noise, and citation bias: A foun...

Attorney proposes model to explore “what could be the potential impacts (good, bad, or indifferent) of citation gaming...

Citation Gaming-Simple Ecosystems Model

"This paper considers a simple theoretical model of: authors, papers, publications, publisher sub-ecosystems, ecosystems and biospheres and academic knowledge production and reward markets, to explore what could be the potential impacts (good, bad, or indifferent) of citation gaming and related incentives, perverse incentives and potentially unethical behavior?"

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5400071