2026/04/02 by Qilin Zhang, Ye Li, Lex Bouter · 1 voice
Arts and Humanities · Decision Sciences · #Academic Writing and Publishing #scientometrics and bibliometrics research #Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
paper · doi:10.1080/08989621.2026.2654564
openalex publication_date 2026/04/02 · openalex created_date 2026/04/02 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/02
BACKGORUND: Citation irregularities undermine the fairness and reliability of scholarly communication, yet the terms used to describe these behaviors remain fragmented and inconsistently defined. METHODS: We employed a backward‑snowballing strategy to identify relevant publications on the historical development of views on citation irregularities, with particular attention to the literal meaning and the conceptual evolution of terms. RESULTS: Through an inductive analysis of the 50 distinct terms identified, we propose a classification consisting of nine categories: mis-citation, citation distortion, uncritical citation, irrelevant citation, excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, selective citation, coercive citation, and bibliographic plagiarism. CONCLUSIONS: The classification functions as a multi‑dimensional descriptive tool, and an instance of citation irregularity may fall into more than one category. This classification helps to clarify citation irregularities and provides a structured framework for understanding their underlying patterns.