Self-citation attitudes and practices in applied linguistics: A mixed-methods study

Excessive self-citation is a questionable research practice that has been found to be positively correlated with several researcher background characteristics. This study focuses on the closely related practice of gratuitous self-citation, which has been defined as an unnecessary (although not necessarily excessive) reference to one’s own work that does not contribute to the scholarly value of a new piece. Toward this end, we conducted an anonymous online survey to gauge US-based applied linguists’ perceptions of and attitudes toward self-citation. The results, among other findings, suggest that the maximum number of self-citations per publication should be around five or six; however, 47% of respondents indicated that journals should not impose a limit. Additionally, 54% of participants noted that employing gratuitous self-citation is unacceptable. Nonetheless, 77% of scholars admitted that Google Scholar metrics are important for hiring and promotion. Correlational analyses revealed that several participant background variables were associated with the percentage of self-citation in general but not gratuitous self-citation. Multiple regression analyses indicated that gender was the only meaningful predictor of gratuitous self-citation, whereas age was the only meaningful predictor of self-citation in general. Finally, thematic analysis of qualitative comments provided additional perspectives on how applied linguists define gratuitous self-citation and identify reasons for engaging in self-citation as well as what harms gratuitous self-citation can cause.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Methods in Applied Linguistics
Published
2026-02-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2026.100307
Primary Topic
Academic Writing and Publishing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Self-citation attitudes and practices in applied linguistics: A mixed-methods study

Luke Plonsky, Ekaterina Sudina, Mina Bikmohammadi
Research Methods in Applied Linguistics
Academic Writing and Publishing
article

Self-citation attitudes and practices in applied linguistics: A mixed-methods study

Luke Plonsky, Ekaterina Sudina, Mina Bikmohammadi
article en

Abstract

Excessive self-citation is a questionable research practice that has been found to be positively correlated with several researcher background characteristics. This study focuses on the closely related practice of gratuitous self-citation, which has been defined as an unnecessary (although not necessarily excessive) reference to one’s own work that does not contribute to the scholarly value of a new piece. Toward this end, we conducted an anonymous online survey to gauge US-based applied linguists’ perceptions of and attitudes toward self-citation. The results, among other findings, suggest that the maximum number of self-citations per publication should be around five or six; however, 47% of respondents indicated that journals should not impose a limit. Additionally, 54% of participants noted that employing gratuitous self-citation is unacceptable. Nonetheless, 77% of scholars admitted that Google Scholar metrics are important for hiring and promotion. Correlational analyses revealed that several participant background variables were associated with the percentage of self-citation in general but not gratuitous self-citation. Multiple regression analyses indicated that gender was the only meaningful predictor of gratuitous self-citation, whereas age was the only meaningful predictor of self-citation in general. Finally, thematic analysis of qualitative comments provided additional perspectives on how applied linguists define gratuitous self-citation and identify reasons for engaging in self-citation as well as what harms gratuitous self-citation can cause.

Research Methods in Applied LinguisticsVol. 5(1)
East Carolina University (US), Northern Arizona University (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Academic Writing and Publishing
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.