{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,2]],"date-time":"2026-04-02T01:47:17Z","timestamp":1775094437917,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"MDPI AG","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,1]],"date-time":"2017-08-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1501545600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Publications"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Who among the many researchers is most likely to usher in a new era of scientific breakthroughs? This question is of critical importance to universities, funding agencies, as well as scientists who must compete under great pressure for limited amounts of research money. Citations are the current primary means of evaluating one\u2019s scientific productivity and impact, and while often helpful, there is growing concern over the use of excessive self-citations to help build sustainable careers in science. Incorporating superfluous self-citations in one\u2019s writings requires little effort, receives virtually no penalty, and can boost, albeit artificially, scholarly impact and visibility, which are both necessary for moving up the academic ladder. Such behavior is likely to increase, given the recent explosive rise in popularity of web-based citation analysis tools (Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Altmetric) that rank research performance. Here, we argue for new metrics centered on transparency to help curb this form of self-promotion that, if left unchecked, can have a negative impact on the scientific workforce, the way that we publish new knowledge, and ultimately the course of scientific advance.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3390\/publications5030020","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,1]],"date-time":"2017-08-01T03:30:06Z","timestamp":1501558206000},"page":"20","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/mdpi_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":39,"title":["Improving the Measurement of Scientific Success by Reporting a Self-Citation Index"],"prefix":"10.3390","volume":"5","author":[{"given":"Justin","family":"Flatt","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Institute of Molecular Life Sciences, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland"}]},{"given":"Alessandro","family":"Blasimme","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Hirschengraben 84, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland"}]},{"given":"Effy","family":"Vayena","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Hirschengraben 84, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland"}]}],"member":"1968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2215","DOI":"10.1002\/asi.23329","article-title":"Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references","volume":"66","author":"Bornmann","year":"2015","journal-title":"J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol."},{"key":"ref_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Wilsdon, J. (2016). The Metric Tide: The Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment & Management, SAGE Publications Ltd.","DOI":"10.4135\/9781473978782"},{"key":"ref_3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"R516","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cub.2014.04.039","article-title":"Publication metrics and success on the academic job market","volume":"24","author":"Manor","year":"2014","journal-title":"Curr. Biol."},{"key":"ref_4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"16569","DOI":"10.1073\/pnas.0507655102","article-title":"An index to quantify an individual\u2019s scientific research output","volume":"102","author":"Hirsch","year":"2005","journal-title":"Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA"},{"key":"ref_5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"741","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-010-0193-9","article-title":"An index to quantify an individual\u2019s scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship","volume":"85","author":"Hirsch","year":"2010","journal-title":"Scientometrics"},{"key":"ref_6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1038\/embor.2008.233","article-title":"The state of h index research. Is the h-index the ideal way to measure research performance?","volume":"10","author":"Bornmann","year":"2009","journal-title":"EMBO Rep."},{"key":"ref_7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"95","DOI":"10.1087\/20110203","article-title":"The outflow of academic papers from china: Why is it happening and can it be stemmed?","volume":"24","author":"Shao","year":"2011","journal-title":"Learn. Publ."},{"key":"ref_8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"7","DOI":"10.1186\/1742-5581-3-7","article-title":"Three options for citation tracking: Google scholar, scopus and web of science","volume":"3","author":"Bakkalbasi","year":"2006","journal-title":"Biomed. Digit. Libr."},{"key":"ref_9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"556","DOI":"10.3389\/fnhum.2016.00556","article-title":"The slavery of the h-index-measuring the unmeasurable","volume":"10","author":"Kreiner","year":"2016","journal-title":"Front. Hum. Neurosci."},{"key":"ref_10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"85","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-010-0306-5","article-title":"Detecting h-index manipulation through self-citation analysis","volume":"87","author":"Bartneck","year":"2011","journal-title":"Scientometrics"},{"key":"ref_11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Porter, T.M. (1995). Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life, Princeton University Press.","DOI":"10.1515\/9780691210544"},{"key":"ref_12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9384","DOI":"10.1073\/pnas.1609793113","article-title":"Opinion: Science in the age of selfies","volume":"113","author":"Geman","year":"2016","journal-title":"Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA"},{"key":"ref_13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"424","DOI":"10.1186\/s13059-014-0424-0","article-title":"The kardashian index: A measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists","volume":"15","author":"Hall","year":"2014","journal-title":"Genome Biol."},{"key":"ref_14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"427","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-007-1777-2","article-title":"Does self-citation pay?","volume":"72","author":"Fowler","year":"2007","journal-title":"Scientometrics"},{"key":"ref_15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"King, M.M., Bergstrom, C.T., Correll, S.J., Jacquet, J., and West, J.D. (arXiv, 2016). Men set their own cites high: Gender and self-citation across fields and over time, arXiv.","DOI":"10.1177\/2378023117738903"},{"key":"ref_16","first-page":"1","article-title":"Self-citation by researchers: Narcissism or an inevitable outcome of a cohesive and sustained research program?","volume":"7","author":"Cooke","year":"2014","journal-title":"Ideas Ecol. Evol."}],"container-title":["Publications"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2304-6775\/5\/3\/20\/pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,11]],"date-time":"2025-10-11T18:44:42Z","timestamp":1760208282000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2304-6775\/5\/3\/20"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,1]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,9]]}},"alternative-id":["publications5030020"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/publications5030020","relation":{},"ISSN":["2304-6775"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2304-6775","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,1]]}}}