How to categorize citation irregularities: A proposal based on an exploration of the literature

Citation irregularities undermine the fairness and reliability of scholarly communication, yet the terms used to describe these behaviors remain fragmented and inconsistently defined.

We employed a backward‑snowballing strategy to identify relevant publications on the historical development of views on citation irregularities, with particular attention to the literal meaning and the conceptual evolution of terms.

Through an inductive analysis of the 50 distinct terms identified, we propose a classification consisting of nine categories: mis-citation, citation distortion, uncritical citation, irrelevant citation, excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, selective citation, coercive citation, and bibliographic plagiarism.

The classification functions as a multi‑dimensional descriptive tool, and an instance of citation irregularity may fall into more than one category. This classification helps to clarify citation irregularities and provides a structured framework for understanding their underlying patterns.