Reviewers may favor manuscripts that cite their own work, according to an analysis of 18,400 articles from four open-access journals. This study, which is still awaiting peer review, was published online recently.
Adrian Barnett, who studies peer review at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, notes that authors sometimes cite papers because reviewers ask them to. While it can be reasonable to request citations, excessive demands can make the peer-review process feel transactional. Citations can elevate a researcher’s credibility through metrics like the h-index.
This practice, known as coercive citation, raises ethical concerns in the research community. Balazs Aczel, a psychologist at Eötvös Loránd University, points out that while this isn’t the first investigation of reviewer citation requests, the study’s thorough analysis is noteworthy. However, barriers like limited data from publishers complicate this field of research.
The preprint analyzed articles from four platforms—F1000Research, Wellcome Open Research, Gates Open Research, and Open Research Europe. All versions of the articles and reviewer comments are publicly available. Of the 37,000 reviews reviewed, 54% of reviewers approved articles without changes while around 8% rejected them. Reviewers were found more likely to approve articles if their work was cited, with a notable distinction: those who requested citation from their own research were less likely to approve the article compared to those not making such requests.
In comments, Barnett noted that those who asked for citations often used words like “need” and “please,” which some interpret as coercive. Jan Feld, a metascience researcher, argues that these terms alone don’t imply coercion; there may be valid reasons for suggesting citations.
Recent surveys show that 80% of researchers believe peer review should be transparent and free from biases like self-citation. Ethical concerns continue to be debated, particularly as the academic world pushes for integrity in research practices.
While the insights from this study may stir discussion, it’s essential for both authors and reviewers to maintain a balanced relationship, ensuring that the quality of research, not just citations, is the focal point.
For more detailed information, you can check the full preprint analysis of these findings here.
Source link
Peer review,Publishing,Science,Humanities and Social Sciences,multidisciplinary
