When you write an original article or a review article, you need to quote many specific articles on the subject, sometimes you need to quote your own articles because you are an expert on the subject, it is ethical this, we should not do it or sometimes it is necessary for lack from other studies, what is your opinion?
It is right, ethical and acceptable to have self citation in the paper, especially if we have papers that deal with same topic/issue. Some of our researches/papers are even connected - one paper motivated us to write another and examine that subject further and it is good to reference on our previous papers.
When write an original article or a review article, need to quote many specific articles on the subject, sometimes need to quote our own articles because authors are an expert on the subject, it is ethical as well many of times it is necessary for lack or limited other studies for reference work.
Self citation is ethical and acceptable as long as it is relevant in the present work. If it works for others, then it is expected to work for the initiator.
Med J Armed Forces India. 2017 Apr;73(2):181-183. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2016.11.008.
The ethics of peer and editorial requests for self-citation of their work and journal.
Teixeira da Silva JA1.
Peer reviewers are expected to be experts in a field of study and should be versed with the pertinent literature related with the manuscript they are reviewing. Editors might not necessarily be experts in a particular field, but they have the responsibility of overseeing the requests made by peers, and assessing whether these are ethically appropriate, or not. Thus, requests by peers to cite unrelated literature, which may or may not be their own literature, could be unethical, especially if the objective is to improve their own citations or to boost the citations of the journal for which they are reviewing. In contrast, requests to cite pertinent work that is in fact missing from the paper's literature, even if it may be the reviewer or editor's work, or from the same journal, is acceptable. Editors ultimately approve the requests and suggestions made by reviewers, so inappropriate suggestions made by peer reviewers are the responsibility of the editor and journal. There needs to be a bias-free mechanism in place that offers protection to authors who wish to complain, and consequences for editors who do not conduct an impartial decision. Authors have the right to challenge such suggestions, but may face unfair retaliation in the form of a rejection if they resist making changes that they perceive as being inappropriate.
Self citations may be avoided unless research is related; Credit of citation should be given to researchers really participated in academic.
Nothing wrong in it,
Because sometime previous research is in continuation with same topic or related topic.
It is right, ethical and acceptable to have self citation in the paper, especially if we have papers that deal with same topic/issue. Some of our researches/papers are even connected - one paper motivated us to write another and examine that subject further and it is good to reference on our previous papers.
I think, that It's not a matter of ethics at all. Is this a good practice or not? Self-citation is an inevitable sometimes and this is a fact.
Good question dear Pankaj Kumar , i am not sure about the answer but in my personal opinion only the necessary, but i would like the answer of other researchers that have more experience, thanks
I think there is no limit and person can cite the work of same area.
In reply of Mr Pankaj Tomar
Self citation strengthen your work and readers know the details of work done by author. It is my opinion.
There is noting unethical in self citation if it is relevant.
Once an article had been published, it will be citable for all researchers. the writer is one of that population.
I think , if research work is in same area and/or extension of earlier research work, self citation will be considered like citations of other papers in particular area of research.
Citations in a research paper, are indicators of works that are related to the research work that is established. Research is a methodical, purpose driven scientific activity to search and either extend or establish truth. In this process, any citation is vital, either a previous work of the author (which is termed as self citation) or other citations as well.
If an article is a continuation of a previous article of the same author, then self citation is inevitable.
If author uses a method of its own invention, then self citation cannot be avoided.
There are however many gray self citation practices:
- A PhD student is forced to cite his/her supervisor work, because of the given guides, even if that is not necessary. So there are authors who have almost 100% self citations, just covered under different names, those of their students
Thanks for your comments, Many of your opinions agree that if it is necessary to cite oneself it should be done, especially if you are an expert on a subject, but it should be done with moderation
Sometimes it is necessary to cite own earlier work,so not unethical.
There is no doubt in the ethics of auto-quoting, especially if in your publicationis discussed a new subject in which you feel yourself an expert
this link is useful
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3643/will-self-citation-be-viewed-as-self-promotion-in-academia
regards
If someone is working on a particular area/topic, it become necessary to cite his/her own work.
Self citation reflect the how researcher is deeply concerned in his specialty.
Dear Catia
The self-citation issue does not arise if a researcher adopts the scientific method, which implies the complete communication of theories, data, instruments and results that are necessary for the correct exposure of his scientific work and that are produced by anyone, including the author himself. The issue is created inside and outside the scientific community when to evaluate the work of a researcher we accepts a scheme based on the "publish or perish" concept. It is therefore not a question of ethics but of the quality of scientific work and its evaluation. If to evaluate we accept cold methods for the calculation of the author impact and we do not enter into the merit of the evaluation of the real quality of work then it will be easier to exclude the author evaluation by assuming that the self-citations are made only to increase artificially the impact of the author.
So, it is not an ethical question but it would be enough to follow only the scientific method.
I think there is nothing wrong with self citation as long as it is purposeful. I do it most often when I do a follow up or expansion of previous study.
We work sequentially based on previous findings so self-citation is typical.
I agree with reply of many fellows "ethical and necessary". We should be proud to cite our own work if it has quality.
To avoid self-estimation and not to pretend, at times, Miguel de Cervantes cited his own work as if it was someone's else (Saavedra).
If it is dealing with the same topic and a continuation of previous investigations. It's inevitable and sometimes a necessity
Self citation shows itself clearly as if it is ethical or not, it'll be justifiable in a research from its content when citing self papers. e.g. it is reasonable for a researcher to cite his previous innovation when it is a basis for another one.
However, I exceedingly appreciate this honesty from Catia Cillóniz ,
Self citation to a limited extent is not unethical if there is a clear connection between previous work and the current work. However, it is not considered as a good practice, if it is merely to boost one's own citations. The idea of excessive self-citation is still a grey area in scientific publication.
Self citation of a genuine work should get a mention like any other work.
on the contrary, the publisher has to check , whether the cited article is genuinely cited or there is no need of it.
on the part of author , it is 100% ethical to sight an article he genuinely authored and he feels is useful in the current article.
Self-citation, in form that the Author already well- versed or done some work in the area. Self-citation is one kind of indication, our expertise.
Nice question to set the record straight. As long as it is not a habit just to boost one's own image, it has to be done to share complete information.
As most others have said,it is ofte necessary to cite ones own work,but it should be done with caution to avoid bolstering ones own profile or image as that may detract from the value of new work being presented.
In niche areas the need for self citation is sometimes unavoidable.
Totally agree with @YOGESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI , If your present work is related to your previous work then self citation is ethical.
A moderate amount of self-citation is inevitable particularly if someone works in a restricted field of research. But excessive self-citation can be considered rather absurd and unprofessional. The situation further get worse when a researcher excessively self-cite grey literature like annual progress reports, conference presentations, newsletters, etc. which ultimately build bad impression about the researcher/author in scientific arena.
If you explained something at length before in another work there is no need to repeat it again, you simply refer to the original source. Since often enough you do repeated research into one of the topics of your expertise, it becomes unavoidable with time to refer to your previous work. Needless to say that you don't need to force your whole list of publications into a piece.
Please refer following related discussions on RG : -
Is self-citation good for showing the continuity of the research and avoiding self plagiarism? Please share your experience and thought.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_self-citation_good_for_showing_the_continuity_of_the_research_and_avoiding_self_plagiarism_Please_share_your_experience_and_thought
Self citation... Is it good or bad? Is there any rule of thumb for the acceptable percentage of self citations to the total number of citations?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Self_citation_Is_it_good_or_bad_Is_there_any_rule_of_thumb_for_the_acceptable_percentage_of_self_citations_to_the_total_number_of_citations
I consider that the self citation is ethical and necessary if the present work or new idea is related to its and brings a plus value to it.
Self-citation is a legitimate part of research IF the intent is genuinely to highlight the previous work and it is relevant. Self-citation is, of course, better than self-plagiarism. One's own work should be cited just like any other source. HOWEVER, if one is citing oneself simply to try to boost one's h-index or the likes, it is unethical. Usually it is pretty obvious. I had a colleague cite a paper on which I was a co-author. The section being cited had nothing to do with our paper. Such is not acceptable or ethical.
Please also see 99 answers to the following question: " Is self-citation good for showing the continuity of the research and avoiding self plagiarism? Please share your experience and thought. "
I think the self-citation is good if it satisfies the ethical issue and fulfill the demand or necessity of paper. There is no limit of self citing except the essentially based. However, sometime researchers try to increase their citation by self citing.
I totally agree with @ Rajiv pandey sir, self citing of our peer reviewed publication is ethical and its subjected to necessity of our manuscript.
Yes as my colleagues have said, it is ethical if you are building on from past research and articles which are yours. It also saves endless repitition.
Warm regards Tina
Self citation is not a bad research writing practice rather it's good when the paper is the continuation of a previous research publication.
I agree with YOGESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI .
Moreover, self-quotations become absolutely essential when a researcher deals with a field that has not been explored or, at least, almost unknown, if not from himself.
Self citation, is it ethical or necessary sometimes?
Self citation sometimes is needed when your current research is building on top of your previous or other research completed. Also sometimes self-citation is required when the research area you are embarking is very niche that there is limited literature review you can refer to.
Self-citation, if made as a part of literature review or discussion in the correct perspective, you can not say it is unethical or unnecessary. Sometimes, however, we may wonder the very need of a particular self-citation; it may be the result of a self boosting exercise!
I think it is necessary sometimes, especially if we have worked on a topic in depth and in some research we have left seeds or ideas that serve later to work other issues, there we leave in evidence our capacity for analysis, our reflections and our maturity as a researcher
In circumstances, like someone working in a restricted research field, self-citation (even excessive self-citation) may be unavoidable and valid. Self-citation also become inevitable for research scholars pursuing post-doctoral work as follow up of their PhD studies. However, excessive self-citation of grey literature like annual progress reports, conference presentations, newsletters, etc. is not a good practice and ultimately reflects badly upon the authors.
I can agree that sometimes it can be acceptable, the self-citation, but I cannot accept that when someone is reviewer and put the list of his own papers that authors need to read, compare and put it in references list is not acceptable. On that way he forced authors to cite the reviewer
Self-citation of previous publications (papers, projects, etc.) is useful and acceptable as much as can indicate link to previous stages of study, results, etc. that can’t be included in the resistive current paper/publication. I have seen books / papers where the author cites on almost 100% his own work. This is definitely disputable practice. But self-citation shall be excluded in the quantitative assessment of indices for achievements of the respective person.
Srete Nikolovski. your question is thought provoking. Dimitar Bogdanov I agree with you. Also, coercive reviewer self-citation is something to be discouraged so I agree with Srete Nikolovski .There has been a lot of controversy about self-citation and variation by gender and other traits. However, some self citation takes the form of inbreeding of ideas by a group of authors.
Here is an interesting article that touts self-citation as being a sign of productivity of authors.
Article Self-citation is the hallmark of productive authors, of any gender
Dimitar
Yes, self-citation is excluding in WOS and do not use for promotion to higher level of scientific promotion
Considero que si se puede hacer autocitación, sobre todo si trabaja con su misma línea de investigación. Esto es ético porque es su producción intelectual con la cual pudiera estar de acuerdo o disentir de lo que algún momento por su madurez no lo evidencio como en la contemporaneidad.
Self-cites are not inherently problematic. Most scientific publications describe a part of a longer-term research effort, and self-citations can put the new publication in the context of that larger effort. Self-cites become a problem only when they are either spurious or biased.
https://spie.org/membership/spie-professional-magazine/archives/2016_january_archive/when-do-self-citations-become-a-problem-in-research?SSO=1
Self citation sometimes is needed when your current research is related with your previous research because you are an expert on your area, it is ethical and helpful for reader to understand more about your work. Our aim is to deliver our knowledge in fair way
Not really sure about it but I think, Excessive self-citation can be unethical in some ways but a moderate often considered OK.
If necessary to give background of your work or to corroborate your discussion, self-citation limited to 1 or 2 is fairly OK.
Dear Catia Cillóniz ,in fact it is generally unethical, but because library materials and articles are limited online. Many personal quotes appear in articles to compile a map of the research flow. the forbidden is copying people's writing, without writing the source. and carried out for limited purposes. regards.
Although it's true that citations are always helpful, there are obviously limits ...The ethical rule has to be: cite your work if it's relevant, and don't give it preferential treatment over the work of others. In short: use the same criteria for previous references to your work as you would use for citing others. No excessive citation, no self-censorship... As with all referencing, the referenced works must be pertinent to what is being described in the paper referencing them
Self citation is sometimes needed when your present work is related to your previous work. I think it isn't any problematic task.
"Given the cumulative nature of the production of new knowledge, self-citations constitute a natural part of the communication process."(Costas et al., 2010)
Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T.N., & Bordons, M. (2010). Self-citations at the meso and individual levels effects of different calculation methods Scientometrics (82), 517-537
I think it is ethical and it can be used most especially when you are writing a related research
There is no difference between self-citation and others, on the point of fairness if the researcher does it without selfish interest . One's previous work is the same as others laced with evidence to project a new idea or to support it.
Separately, one may recall from their recent work as a justification in furthering studies, thus warrants self-citation.
It ethical if it has relevance with the present work. In as much as the cited material of yours went through an independent and thorough review and was accepted for publication by anonymous reviewers, it is a reference resource material, which can be cited by the authors and other researchers.
It is ethical. As can be motivated by your previous research to add new research so in such cases self citations become necessary.
It can be a necessity, if no other authors show up in a specific topic.
Otherwise, it is enough to include your works in the reference/literature body.
I think self citation is necessary when you have done related works.
Citations of author's own previous work even if less appropriate as compared to other possible references, merely to increase citation number is not proper. Self citation is fine in those fields in which the contributions are incremental with respect to existing work and authors cite their previous research to avoid reproducing the same material in further publications. Self-citations are more common in trending and niche research fields, due to the limited number of citable documents.
Catia Cillóniz -
Generally, to assure an accurate practice, self-citations should be used to support the arguments, not to demonstrate your research. Moreover, self-cites may used to compare recent findings of the research with previous results when studying the same theme. The important point here is to avoid turning self-citations into self-promotion.
Self citations is ethical. It only becomes wrong when you cite your irrelevant papers just to increase your h-index and advertise your work
Indeed It is ethical and necessary. But it must have connection subject wise.. Irrelevant citations are silly and foolish.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude