From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:12:32 +0100

In a recently published paper, Justin Flatt and his two co-authors
proposed the creation of the Self-Citation Index, or s-index. The
purpose of the s-index would be to measure how often a scientist cites
their own work. This is desirable the authors believe because current
incentive systems tend to encourage researchers to cite their own
works excessively.

In other words, since the number of citations a researcher’s works
receive enhances his/her reputation there is a temptation to add
superfluous self-citations to articles. This boosts the authors’
h-index – the author-level metric now widely used as a measure of
researcher productivity.

Amongst other things, excessive self-citation gives those who engage
in it an unfair advantage over more principled researchers, an
advantage moreover that grows over time: a 2007 paper estimated that
every self-citation increases the number of citations from others by
about one after one year, and by about three after five years. This
creates unjustified differences in researcher profiles.

Since women self-cite less frequently than men, they are put at a
particular disadvantage. A 2006 paper found that men are between 50
and 70 per cent more likely than women to cite their own work.

However, any plans to create and manage a researcher-led s-index face
a practical challenge: much of the data that would be needed to do so
are currently imprisoned behind paywalls – notably behind the paywalls
of the Web of Science and Scopus.

More here: http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/in-recently-published-paper-justin.html