Cross‐cultural differences in self‐promotion: A study of self‐citations in management journals

Abstract

We study cross‐cultural differences in self‐promotion by comparing the self‐citation behaviour of scholarly authors originating from individualist and collectivist cultures, using original data on 1,346 journal articles published between 2009 and 2014 in the fields of Management and Business. Our main finding is that articles by authors from individualist cultures are about twice as likely to contain many self‐citations. Our results confirm the presence of a gender gap in self‐citations, but we show that this effect is smaller than the cultural effect and that the effect appears to be stable across cultures. These findings show that the structure of rewards and costs associated with particular self‐promotion tactics differ from culture to culture. Implications of cultural variations in self‐promotion are discussed. Practitioner points We develop theory and provide empirical evidence about cultural and gender differences in self‐promoting behaviour. As the workforce diversifies, a broader awareness of these differences might affect the actions of both employees and HR departments.

Female citation impact superiority 1996–2018 in six out of seven English‐speaking nations

“…The data for the most recent three years could be misleading because of the possibility that they are unduly influenced by self-citations, as well as the lower MNLCS accuracy due to the higher proportion of uncited articles and outliers (high kurtosis values). Self-citation rates vary by country (Deschacht & Maes, 2017) and so may affect the seven nations differently. The results before 2014 should not be affected by outliers, however, except for a small number of years, because the kurtosis values are moderate in almost all cases.…”

A multi‐motive framework for predicting variability in self‐enhancement

“…Indeed, self-deceptive enhancement is related to subsequent poorer performance (Johnson et al, 1997). Thus, in the same way, public self-promotion may undermine long-term Maes, 2017;Ellis & Wittenbaum, 2000;Mezulis, Abramson, Hyde, & Hankin, 2004;Sato & Cameron, 1999;Sheldon, Rauschnabel, Antony, & Car, 2017;7 D'Argembeau & Van der Linden, 2008;Sedikides & Green, 2000;8 Johnson, Vincent, & Ross, 1997;Mele, 1983;Taylor & Brown, 1988;9 Liu & Steele, 1986;Steele & Liu, 1983;10 Robins & Beer, 2001;Cooley, 1902;11 Murray et al, 1996;12 Sherman & Cohen, 2002;Steele, 1988Steele, /199913 Brown, 1993;Jaremka et al, 2011; 14 Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001;15 Taylor & Armor, 1996;16 Johnson et al, 1997;17 Festinger, 1954;Suls, 1977;18 Buunk et al, 1990;Stout, Dasgupta, Hunsinger, & McManus, 2011;Wills, 1981;19 Hoorens, Pandelaere, Oldersma, & Sedikides, 2012;20 Robins & Beer, 2001; 21 Krizan & Bushman, 2011;Robins & Beer, 2001; 22 Bogart, Benotsch, & Pavlovic, 2004;23 Brickman & Bulman, 1977;Collins, 1996;Meltzer & Rourke, 2005;Tesser, 1988;24…”

La autocita en artículos de investigación publicados en Scielo Chile: variación según el área de la ciencia y la experticia del autor

“…Creemos que su uso es propio de las ciencias humanas debido a que en ellas, tradicionalmente, la necesidad de investigación ha sido más difícilmente demostrable, por lo que los autores recurren a distintas estrategias para posicionar sus trabajos, entre ellas, el uso de autocitas para lograr aumentar su índice h y, así, lograr renombre en su comunidad. Esta idea es compartida por diversos autores que afirman que dicho índice es susceptible de ser manipulado y una forma común de lograrlo es, precisamente, mediante el abuso de autocitaciones (Deschacht y Maes, 2017;Carlisle et al, 2017;Seeber et al, 2017;Copez-Lonzoy y Paz-Jesús, 2018).…”

“…Para algunos, la autocita permite demostrar la vinculación temática de las investigaciones y reafirmar la autoridad investigativa del autor, por lo tanto, sería una práctica necesaria en el discurso científico (Campanario y Candelario, 2010;Gálvez, 2017;Reiter, Mimouni y Mimouni, 2015). En contraposición, hay quienes plantean que la finalidad de las autocitas es la autopromoción y el aumento del factor de impacto de las revistas (Deschacht y Maes, 2017;Seeber et al, 2017). La autocita sería, por tanto, un vicio innecesario o práctica cuestionable que surge como respuesta estratégica a las métricas de publicación (Anderson, Seashore y Earle, 1994) y para alcanzar el reconocimiento de los pares y de la comunidad.…”