The case concerns an introductory chapter in a book.
The publisher was first contacted about potential misconduct as part of a broader investigation into an academic who was a coauthor on an introductory chapter in a book. The publisher's subsequent investigation identified excessive self-citation in the work (one of the coauthors is named as an author on 12 out of 16 referenced works). Plagiarism screening performed at the time of publication did not show any suspicious activities. The review of all chapters published in the book confirmed that the review was performed in line with best practices; citation manipulation was an isolated incident identified only for the introductory chapter.
The introductory chapter was sent out for an additional post-publication review which confirmed that the content suits the purpose of the introductory editorial to the edited volume (which is to introduce the theme of the book). The individual that practised excessive self-citation appeared as a coauthor on an introductory chapter together with the editor of the book because he was an assistant to the editor. Assistants are experts, but are not experienced enough to qualify for the editorial role and do not have access to any of the editorial features nor do they review the chapters. Only the academic editor performs the review. Assistants to the editors are mentioned only in the imprint page as such. They are not present on the book cover or anywhere else. This is how their support to the editor is acknowledged.
Question for COPE Council
- How should the publisher proceed? Although excessive self-citation was confirmed, the content of the work seems to be valid and did not appear to include any instances of plagiarism or research misconduct.
Advice on this case is from a small number of COPE Council Members. Most cases on the COPE website are presented to the COPE Forum where advice is offered by a wider group of COPE Members and COPE Council Members. Advice on individual cases is not formal COPE guidance.
Self-citation is a difficult problem to manage. It is potentially a valid feature of an introduction to a special edition or book, for example, where the author has been prolific in a small field, but it can become excessive when it is used as a form of esteem-granting or as a means to inflate the impact factor of the piece of work. The latter forms of self-citation are sometimes regarded as a means to ‘game’ the system. Different disciplines have different conventions on the use of self-citation in these circumstances, and some published work will necessarily make reference to a limited range of other works. Publishers will need to pay careful attention to the context surrounding the nature of a book, chapter or article to properly rule out excessive and deliberate self-citation. Several publishers are producing policies on self-citation which set an upper limit on the number or proportion of references which can be self-citations. One example is a maximum of three instances, or 10 per cent of all references. Others are developing policies to suppress Journal Impact Factors if excessive self-citation is a feature, or stating that citations to the Special Issue articles in Special Issue editorials are not allowed (see examples here and here).
In this case it appears that the publisher has investigated the sources and deemed them to be valid citations. To address the current concern, the publisher may wish to post a correction or editorial note stating that excessive self-citation was identified after publication and that they apologise for not recognising this sooner. At a minimum, the publisher should educate the editors about self-citations and expected future behaviour. If the author is unapologetic or there are signs that this is repeat behaviour, the publisher may inform the author's institution of this breach in publication ethics.
The publisher should also develop a clear policy for excessive citation (otherwise regarded as citation manipulation). This is in line with COPE’s recommendations which state that “[Publishers] should develop policies and standards to determine self-citation thresholds, provide educational resources to support best practice and establish procedures to respond to potential misconduct.”
Publishers can find more guidance via COPE’s discussion paper on citation manipulation.