View source for Resource:87b2ae47-676d-4ddd-8a53-666746c9ce1b

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Major indexing service rejects appeals by two suppressed journals
|Is About=In this factual case study, two academic journals were suppressed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) because they allegedly have excessively self-cited in order to raise their impact factor.
|Important Because=This is an interesting case for several reasons. Firstly, it shows that allegations of misconduct are not restricted to individual researchers and their institutions but also to journal editors and publishers; although such cases have so far been less frequently encountered, they are now becoming increasingly common.  

Secondly, the specific allegations may appear more difficult to investigate and/or prove as misconduct. One of these two journals, in this specific case, maintain that there was no intention to inflate the impact factor and any excessive self-citation was due to a 'niche' area where no many other journals publish on the topic. 

The case is also interesting and can stimulate discussions as to what is a good balance between broad and specialized referencing.
|Important For=Editors; Journal editors; Journal publishers; All stakeholders in research; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://retractionwatch.com/2020/08/28/major-indexing-service-rejects-appeals-by-two-suppressed-journals/#more-120388
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:5980a54c-1816-499c-8410-7fea8865c89a
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=28/8/20
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Self citation
|Related To Research Area=SH 04.05 - Social and clinical psychology
}}