Sneaked references: Cooked reference metadata inflate citation counts
Open accessAbstract
We report evidence of an undocumented method to manipulate citation counts involving 'sneaked' references. Sneaked references are registered as metadata for scientific articles in which they do not appear. This manipulation exploits trusted relationships between various actors: publishers, the Crossref metadata registration agency, digital libraries, and bibliometric platforms. By collecting metadata from various sources, we show that extra undue references are actually sneaked in at Digital Object Identifier (DOI) registration time, resulting in artificially inflated citation counts. As a case study, focusing on three journals from a given publisher, we identified at least 9% sneaked references (5,978/65,836) mainly benefiting two authors. Despite not existing in the articles, these sneaked references exist in metadata registries and inappropriately propagate to bibliometric dashboards. Furthermore, we discovered 'lost' references: the studied bibliometric platform failed to index at least 56% (36,939/65,836) of the references listed in the HTML version of the publications. The extent of the sneaked and lost references in the global literature remains unknown and requires further investigations. Bibliometric platforms producing citation counts should identify, quantify, and correct these flaws to provide accurate data to their patrons and prevent further citation gaming.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Our preprint version of this manuscript led to some media coverage and triggered an independent investigation from Crossref which confirmed our findings.
“Furthermore, our preprint version of this manuscript (Besançon et al., 2023) led to some media coverage (Singh Chawla, 2023) and triggered an independent investigation from Crossref which confirmed our findings.”
From Sneaked references: Fabricated reference metadata distort citation counts (2024) · cites this paper as Besançon et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 29 · Cited by 31
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Besançon, L., Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2023). Sneaked references: Cooked reference metadata inflate citation counts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.02192
- Labbé, C. (2010). Ike Antkare, one of the great stars in the scientific firmament. ISSI Newsletter, 6(2), 48-52. Retrieved from https:// www.issi-society.org/media/1126/newsletter22.pdf
- Authors
- Besançon, L., Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A.
- Affiliations
- Linköping University (SE)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Institut polytechnique de Grenoble (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Cabanac, Guillaume
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1368-1379
- ISSN
- 2330-1635 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2310.02192
- OpenAlex
- W4396662870
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10
- FWCI
- 8.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- European Commission (HORIZON2020, 951393)
- H2020 European Research Council (951393)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Keywords
- citation manipulation, citation counts, Crossref, digital object identifiers, metadata registration
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
