Strategic Citing and Peer Review in Academic Publishing: Strategies and Realities

In the realm of academic publishing, the act of citing potential referees in an article is often a strategic move. This practice can be used to encourage favorable consideration from those who might review the paper. However, it's important to consider ethical implications and whether this approach is truly effective. Additionally, boosting citations through becoming a referee is a more indirect method with its own limitations.

Strategic Citation: A Strategic Approach

Authors sometimes cite papers by potential reviewers to strategically influence the peer review process. The rationale behind this is simple: if a potential referee sees their own research acknowledged, they might be more inclined to view the submitted work positively. This practice, however, is not a guaranteed method of getting a favorable review. Ethical considerations and potential conflicts of interest should always guide such actions.

The Ineffectiveness of Direct Strategies

There is a belief that one might be able to strategically cite potential referees effectively but the reality is more nuanced. This practice is most effective in disciplines where the number of scholars working on a specific topic is extremely limited, or in journals that do not conduct double-blind peer review. In most cases, the odds of a chosen referee reviewing a paper are quite low.

For example, when selecting potential reviewers for a submitted article, an author might have a shortlist of around 30 possible reviewers. These reviews are typically rotated semi-randomly, ensuring that no single reviewer performs more than one review every 3 to 4 years. This means that if an author randomly selects a few reviewers, the likelihood that one of them will review the paper is approximately 15%, while there is an 85% chance that their chosen reviewers will not be the ones reviewing the paper.

The Value of Peer Review: A Broader Strategy

While citing potential referees can be a strategic move, it is important to view it within the broader context. Becoming a referee can increase visibility and networking opportunities within a field, but it doesn't directly guarantee an increase in citations for your own work. Citations often depend on the quality of your research, its relevance to ongoing discussions, and how effectively it is disseminated.

Engaging in peer review can enhance your reputation and visibility, which is valuable from a career standpoint. However, it should be considered as part of a broader strategy to contribute to your field rather than a direct method for increasing citations. The primary goal of peer review is to ensure the quality and integrity of the academic discourse, and this should be the focus of both reviewers and authors.

The Ethical Considerations and Challenges

There is no denying that the opportunity to strategically cite potential referees might exist, but there are ethical considerations involved. A no-brainer in this case is to reference relevant work by potential reviewers. However, it is important to ensure that such references are genuinely relevant and not just a tactical move.

When considering the effectiveness of this strategy, it is crucial to ask: how many reviews would you have to do to have any measurable effect on your ratings or citations? You can't simply decide to review; you are invited to do so. Reviews take time away from your own research, which means you have to weigh the benefits against the potential costs.

Moreover, there are no easy shortcuts in academic publishing. Persistent, well-thought-out, hard work is the only reliable method. Even if some institutes or journals seem to have flaws or inconsistencies, the best approach is to focus on the integrity of the research and the ethical conduct of peer review.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while authors may cite potential referees as a strategic move in the peer review process, the effectiveness of such a strategy is limited. Becoming a referee can improve visibility and networking, but it is not a direct method for boosting citations.

The key takeaway is that both authors and referees should focus on ethical practices and the integrity of the academic discourse. Strategic citing should be guided by ethical considerations, and the ultimate goal should be the advancement of knowledge and the integrity of the scholarly community.