The paper examines patterns of self-citation in six disciplines distributed equally among the physical and social sciences and the humanities. Sample articles were examined to determine the relative numbers and ages of self-citations and citations to others in the bibliographies and to the exposure given to each type of citation in the text of the articles. Significant differences in the number and age of citations between disciplines were found. Over all, 9% of all citations were self-citations; 15% of physical science citations were self-citations, as opposed to 6% in the social sciences and 3% in the humanities. Within disciplines, there was no significantly different amount of coverage between self-citations and citations to others. Over all, it appears that a lack of substantive differences in self-citation behavior is consistent across disciplines. The number of words devoted to self-citations vary among disciplines, but remain constant within a discipline for both self-citations and citations to others.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
[1] P. Seglen , The skewness of science , Journal of the American Society for Information Science43(9) (1992) 628-638 .
2.
[2] M. MacRoberts and B. MacRoberts , Problems of citation analysis: a critical review , Journal of the American Society for Information Science40(5) (1989) 342-349 .
3.
[3] A. Bayer , A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature , Journal of Marriage and the Family44(3) (1982) 527 .
4.
[4] J. Craig , Characteristics of the use of geology literature , College and Research Libraries30(3) (1969) 230-236 .
5.
[5] P. Earle and B. Vickery , Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations , Journal of Documentation25(2) (1969) 123-141 .
6.
[6] H. Fussler , Characteristics of the research literature used by chemists and physicists in the United States , Library Quarterly19(2) (1949) 119-143 .
7.
[7] R. Tagliacozzo , Self-citation in scientific literature , Journal of Documentation33(4) (1977) 251-265 .
8.
[8] H. Snyder and S. Bonzi , An enquiry into the behavior of author self-citation , Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science 26 (1989) 147-151 .
9.
[9] S. Bonzi and H. Snyder , Motivations for citation: a comparison of self citation and citations to others , Scientometrics21(2) (1991) 245-254 .
10.
[10] S. Bonzi and H. Snyder , Patterns of self citation across fields of inquiry , Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science 27 (1990) 204-207 .
11.
[11] L. McCreery and M. Pao , Bibliometric analysis of ethnomusicology , Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science 21 (1984) 212-215 .
12.
[12] E. Weil , Supporting the humanities , Daedelus107(1) (1973) 27-38 .
13.
[13] E. Garfield , Is information retrieval in the arts and humanities inherently different from that in science? The effect that ISI Citation Index for the Arts and Humanities is expected to have on future scholarship , Library Quarterly50(1) (1980) 40-57 .
14.
[14] D. Nag , R. Saha and C. Satpathi , Patterns of use of earth science literature by Indian geologists , IASLIC Conference Papers15 (1985) 101-108 .
