How to categorize citation irregularities: A proposal based on an exploration of the literature.

IF 4.4 1区哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-02 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2026.2654564

Qilin Zhang, Yitong Li, Lex Bouter

{"title":"How to categorize citation irregularities: A proposal based on an exploration of the literature.","authors":"Qilin Zhang, Yitong Li, Lex Bouter","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2026.2654564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Backgorund: Citation irregularities undermine the fairness and reliability of scholarly communication, yet the terms used to describe these behaviors remain fragmented and inconsistently defined.Methods: We employed a backward‑snowballing strategy to identify relevant publications on the historical development of views on citation irregularities, with particular attention to the literal meaning and the conceptual evolution of terms.Results: Through an inductive analysis of the 50 distinct terms identified, we propose a classification consisting of nine categories: mis-citation, citation distortion, uncritical citation, irrelevant citation, excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, selective citation, coercive citation, and bibliographic plagiarism.Conclusions: The classification functions as a multi‑dimensional descriptive tool, and an instance of citation irregularity may fall into more than one category. This classification helps to clarify citation irregularities and provides a structured framework for understanding their underlying patterns.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2654564"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2654564","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Backgorund: Citation irregularities undermine the fairness and reliability of scholarly communication, yet the terms used to describe these behaviors remain fragmented and inconsistently defined.

Methods: We employed a backward‑snowballing strategy to identify relevant publications on the historical development of views on citation irregularities, with particular attention to the literal meaning and the conceptual evolution of terms.

Results: Through an inductive analysis of the 50 distinct terms identified, we propose a classification consisting of nine categories: mis-citation, citation distortion, uncritical citation, irrelevant citation, excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, selective citation, coercive citation, and bibliographic plagiarism.

Conclusions: The classification functions as a multi‑dimensional descriptive tool, and an instance of citation irregularity may fall into more than one category. This classification helps to clarify citation irregularities and provides a structured framework for understanding their underlying patterns.

查看原文本刊更多论文

如何对违规引文进行分类：一个基于文献探索的建议。

背景：引文违规破坏了学术交流的公平性和可靠性，但用于描述这些行为的术语仍然是碎片化的，定义不一致。方法：我们采用向后滚雪球的策略来识别有关引文不规则性观点的历史发展的相关出版物，特别关注术语的字面意义和概念演变。结果：通过对50个不同术语的归纳分析，我们提出了9类分类：误引、引文扭曲、不加批判、不相关、过度自引、引文操纵、选择性引文、强制引文和书目抄袭。结论：分类是一种多维度的描述工具，一个被引不规律的实例可能属于多个类别。这种分类有助于澄清引文的不规则性，并为理解其潜在模式提供了一个结构化的框架。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

14.70%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.