Trends in self-citation rates in high-impact neurology, neuroscience, and psychiatry journals

Citation metrics influence academic reputation and career trajectories. Recent works have highlighted flaws in citation practices in the Neurosciences, such as the under-citation of women. However, self-citation rates—or how much authors cite themselves—have not yet been comprehensively investigated in the Neurosciences. This work characterizes self-citation rates in basic, translational, and clinical Neuroscience literature by collating 100,347 articles from 63 journals between the years 2000–2020. In analyzing over five million citations, we demonstrate four key findings: (1) increasing self-citation rates of Last Authors relative to First Authors, (2) lower self-citation rates in low- and middle-income countries, (3) gender differences in self-citation stemming from differences in the number of previously published papers, and (4) variations in self-citation rates by field. Our characterization of self-citation provides insight into citation practices that shape the perceived influence of authors in the Neurosciences, which in turn may impact what type of scientific research is done and who gets the opportunity to do it.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
eLife
Published
2025-05-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.88540.4
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trends in self-citation rates in high-impact neurology, neuroscience, and psychiatry journals

Rongtao Jiang, Max Rolison, Marie C McCusker, Saloni Mehta et al.
1 links
eLife
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

Trends in self-citation rates in high-impact neurology, neuroscience, and psychiatry journals

Rongtao Jiang, Max Rolison, Marie C McCusker, Saloni Mehta, Violet M Kimble, Dustin Scheinost, Brendan Adkinson, Michael C. Farruggia, Stephanie Noble, Qinghao Liang, Jean Ye, Matthew Rosenblatt, Margaret L. Westwater, Javid Dadashkarimi, Hannah Peterson, Maya Foster, Raimundo Rodriguez
article en

Abstract

Citation metrics influence academic reputation and career trajectories. Recent works have highlighted flaws in citation practices in the Neurosciences, such as the under-citation of women. However, self-citation rates—or how much authors cite themselves—have not yet been comprehensively investigated in the Neurosciences. This work characterizes self-citation rates in basic, translational, and clinical Neuroscience literature by collating 100,347 articles from 63 journals between the years 2000–2020. In analyzing over five million citations, we demonstrate four key findings: (1) increasing self-citation rates of Last Authors relative to First Authors, (2) lower self-citation rates in low- and middle-income countries, (3) gender differences in self-citation stemming from differences in the number of previously published papers, and (4) variations in self-citation rates by field. Our characterization of self-citation provides insight into citation practices that shape the perceived influence of authors in the Neurosciences, which in turn may impact what type of scientific research is done and who gets the opportunity to do it.

eLifeVol. 12
Northeastern University (US), Yale University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.