
The discussion about how to treat author self-citations driven by policy application and quality measurement intensified in the last years. The definition introduced by Snyder and Bonzi has - in lack of any reasonable alternative - been used in bibliometric practice for science policy purposes. This method, however, does not take into account the weight of self-citing authors among co-authors of both the cited and citing papers. The objective of the present paper is to quantify the weight of self-citations with respect to co-authorship. The analysis is conducted at two levels: at the macro level, namely, for fifteen subject fields and the most active forty countries, and at the meso level, for a set of selected research institutions.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 25 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
