A macro study of self-citation

By Dag W. Aksnes. Scientometrics, 2003

374 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century - A review (2008, background): “Aksnes (2003a) examined the characteristics of highly cited papers, based on a set of highly cited Norwegian papers.”
Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation (2012, neutral): “Although it is still in debate, many scholars suggest that self-citations (i.e. citations by authors themselves) hardly reflect research impact in the scientific community, and therefore non-self-citations should be used to measure research impact (Porter 1977; Glänzel et al. 2006; Aksnes 2003b).”
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, background): “, countries), Aksnes (2003) and Glänzel and Thijs (2004) show that the effect of author self-citations is very small. Glänzel and Thijs (2004) therefore conclude that there is no need to exclude author self-citations. Aksnes (2003) argues that below the macro level author selfcitations should prefer”
Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900 (2014, background): “Early studies showed that self-citations ranged from 8% at the individual level to 20% at the journal level (Garfield & Sher, 1963), and more recent studies have given percentages of author self-citations as high as 36% (Aksnes, 2003).”