Editor's Note

Abstract

Recently, Clarivate, the company responsible for assigning Impact Factors to journals, has taken action against inappropriate citation-boosting practices in four journals.¹ Although these journals have not been delisted from Web of Science, the reporting of their impact factors has been suspended. The decision was made due to the existence of “citation cartels” or “citation rings” which is the practice of inappropriate inflate citation frequencies.² The Impact Factor is widely regarded as an indicator of journal quality and popularity, and it is based on the frequency of citations received by articles published in the journal. The higher the number of citations, the higher the impact factor, which in turn can attract more manuscript submissions, subscriptions, or advertisements, depending on the journal’s business model.

Some journals resort to unofficial means of increasing citation frequency by openly soliciting or indirectly suggesting that authors cite articles from their own journal during manuscript submission.^{3, 4} Additionally, there is a common practice known as “academic etiquette”, which suggests that authors should include at least one citation from the journal to which they are submitting their manuscript. This unethical behavior can occur at both the journal and individual level. Editors or peer reviewers may openly pressure or suggest to authors that they cite their own publications as a condition for acceptance.⁵

To combat these malpractices, some scholars propose extreme measures such as terminating the indexing of impact factors altogether.⁶ However, if such a step is deemed excessive, implementing strict editorial policies and conducting regular audits of the peer review process are appropriate measures to prevent citation boosting. The RMJ has an editorial policy explicitly prohibiting inappropriate citation-boosting practices. The journal also employs a double-blind peer-review process and monitors the comments provided by peer reviewers to ensure the integrity of the review process.