ArticlePDF Available

How to improve your citation count.



Bibliometric data is becoming ever more important in academia. Along with impact factors of academic journals, one of the most important biblio- metric indicators is citation counts. These are increasingly being used in a number of contexts including internal assessment (e.g. going for a job promotion) and external assessments (e.g. use in the Research Excel- lence Framework as a proxy measure of quality and impact). Citation counts take years to accumulate but you can help boost your citations in a number of different ways. Here are my tips and strategies that I personally use and that I know work.
ever more important in academia.
Along with impact factors of academic
journals, one of the most important biblio-
metric indicators is citation counts. These
are increasingly being used in a number of
contexts including internal assessment (e.g.
going for a job promotion) and external
assessments (e.g. use in the Research Excel-
lence Framework as a proxy measure of
quality and impact).
In March 2015 I passed 20,000 citations
on Google Scholar and this is good evidence
that what I do day-to-day works. I have an
h-index of 78 (i.e. at least 78 of my papers
have been cited 78 times) and an i100 index
of 268 (i.e. a least 268 of my papers have
been cited 10 times).
Citation counts take years to accumulate
but you can help boost your citations in a
number of different ways. Here are my tips
and strategies that I personally use and that
I know work. It probably goes without saying
that the more you write and publish, the
greater the number of citations. However,
here are my top ten tips, based on a number
of review papers on the topic (e.g. Born-
mann & Daniel, 2008; Ebrahim, 2012;
Ebrahim et al., 2013, 2014):
1. Choose your paper’s keywords carefully.
In an age of search engines and academic
database searching, keywords in your
publications are critical. Key words and
phrases in the paper’s title and abstract
are also useful for search purposes.
2. Use the same name on all your papers and
use ORCiD. I wish someone had told me
at the start of my career that name initials
were important. I had no idea that there
were so many academics called ‘Mark
Griffiths’. Adding my middle initial, ‘D’,
has helped a lot. You can also use an
ORCiD or ResearcherID and link it to
your publications.
4. Disseminate and promote your research
wherever you can. I find that many British
academics do not like to publicise their
work, but ever since I was a PhD student
I have promoted my work in as many
different placesas possible, including
conferences, seminars, workshops and the
mass media. More recently, I have used
social media excessively (such as tweeting
links to papers I’ve just published). I also
write media releases for work that I think
will have mass appeal and work with
my university’s press office to ensure
dissemination is as wide as possible. I also
actively promote my work in other ways,
including personal dissemination (e.g.
my blogs), as well as sending copies
of papers to key people in my field in
addition to interested stakeholder groups
(policymakers, gaming industry, treatment
providers, etc.). I have a high profile web
presence via my many websites.
5. Cite your previously published papers. Self-
citation is often viewed quite negatively by
some academics but it is absolutely fine to
cite your own work where relevant on a
new manuscript. Citing my own work has
never hurt my academic career.
6. Publish in journals that you know others
in your field read. Although many
academics aim to get in the highest
impact factor journal that they can, this
doesn’t always lead to the highest number
of citations. For instance, when I submit a
gambling paper I often submit to the
Journal of Gambling Studies (impact
Issue 96 September 2015 23
Hints and tips:
How to improve your citation count
Mark Griffiths
factor = 1.8). This is because gambling is a
very interdisciplinary field and many of
my colleagues (who work in disparate
disciplines law, criminology, social
policy, economics, sociology, etc.) don’t
read psychology journals. Some of my
highest cited papers have been in
specialist journals.
7. Try to publish in open access journals.
Research has consistently shown that open
access papers get higher citation rates than
non-open access papers (MacCallum &
Parthasarathy, 2006; Swan, 2010).
8. Write review papers. Although I publish
lots of empirical papers, I learned very early
on in my academic career that review
papers are more likely to be cited. I often
try to write the first review papers in
particular areas as everyone then has to cite
them! Some types of output (especially
those that don’t have an abstract) are
usually poorly cited (e.g. editorials, letters
to editors).
9. Submit to special issues of journals.
Submitting a paper to a special issue of a
journal increases the likelihood that
others in your field will read it (as it will
have more visibility). Papers won’t be
cited if they are not read in the first place!
10. Publish collaboratively, and where
possible with international teams. Again,
research has consistently shown that
working with others collaboratively (i.e.
team-authored papers) and in an
international context has been shown to
significantly increase citation counts.
Finally, here are a few more nuggets of infor-
mation that you should know when thinking
about how to improve your citation counts.
There is a correlation between number of
citations and the impact factor of the
journal (Vanclay, 2013), but if you work in
an interdisciplinary field like me, more
specialist journals may lead to higher
citation counts.
The size of the paper and reference list
correlates with citation counts (Corbyn,
2010) (although this may be connected
with review papers as they are generally
longer and get more cited than non-
review papers (Vanclay, 2013)).
Publish with ‘big names’ in the field (Ball,
2011). Publishing with the pioneers in
your field will lead to more citations.
Get your work on Wikipedia pages.
References cited by Wikipedia pages get
cited more (Marashi et al., 2013). In fact,
write Wikipedia pages for topics in your
areas of expertise.
Somewhat bizarrely (but true) papers that
ask a question in the title have lower
citation rates (Jamali & Nikzad, 2011).
Titles that have colons in the title have
higher citation rates.
Professor Mark Griffiths, Nottingham Trent
Ball, P. (2011). Are scientific reputations boosted artificially?
Nature, 6 May. Retrieved 27 April 2015 from
Bornmann, L. & Daniel, H.D. (2008). What do citation
counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior.
Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.
Corbyn, Z. (2010). An easy way to boost a paper’s citations.
Nature, 13 August. Retrieved 27 April 2015 from
Ebrahim. N.A. (2012). Publication marketing tools – Enhancing
research visibility and improving citations. University of
Malaya. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Retrieved from
Ebrahim, N., Salehi, H., Embi, M.A., Habibi, F., Gholizadeh,
H., Motahar, S.M. & Ordi, A. (2013). Effective strategies
for increasing citation frequency. International Education
Studies, 6(11), 93–99.
Ebrahim, N.A., Salehi, H., Embi, M.A., Habibi, F.,
Gholizadeh, H. & Motahar, S.M. (2014). Visibility and
citation impact. International Education Studies, 7(4),
Jamali, H.R. & Nikzad, M. (2011). Article title type and its
relation with the number of downloads and citations.
Scientometrics, 88(2), 653–661.
Marashi, S-A., Amin, H-N., Alishah, K., Hadi, M., Karimi, A.,
& Hosseinian, S. (2013). Impact of Wikipedia on cita-
tion trends. EXCLI Journal, 12, 15–19.
MacCallum, C.J. & Parthasarathy, H. (2006). Open access
increases citation rate. PLoS Biology, 4(5), e176. Retreived
Swan, Alma (2010) The open access citation advantage:
Studies and results to date. Retrieved 27 April 2015 from
Vanclay, J. K. (2013). Factors affecting citation rates in envi-
ronmental science. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 265–271.
van Wesel, M., Wyatt, S. & ten Haaf, J. (2014). What a differ-
ence a colon makes: How superficial factors influence
subsequent citation. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1601–1615.
24 PsyPAG Quarterly
Mark Griffiths
Full-text available
There are plenty of studies showing that having a followable online presence increases your citation rate. This is why some people think that having an online social media presence is helpful for hiring and promotion. What about academic social networks? And what about personal websites? Do you need one? There are a few reasons to think that you do (e.g., greater control and maintenance of your online presence than university profile pages provide). In the first 15 minutes of this talk I will quickly lay out the research that bears on your having an academic social network profile and having a website. In the latter 15 minutes of the talk (not included here, yet), I will create a website for someone in the room. So when you leave, you should not only be able to make a decision about making an academic social profile and with making a website, you should also be familiar with the process of making a website.
Full-text available
The number of publications is the first criteria for assessing a researcher output. However, the main measurement for author productivity is the number of citations, and citations are typically related to the paper's visibility. In this paper, the relationship between article visibility and the number of citations is investigated. A case study of two researchers who are using publication marketing tools confirmed that the article visibility will greatly improve the citation impact. Some strategies to make the publications available to a larger audience have been presented at the end of this paper.
Full-text available
Due to the effect of citation impact on The Higher Education (THE) world university ranking system, most of the researchers are looking for some helpful techniques to increase their citation record. This paper by reviewing the relevant articles extracts 33 different ways for increasing the citations possibilities. The results show that the article visibility has tended to receive more download and citations. This is probably the first study to collect over 30 different ways to improve the citation record. Further study is needed to explore and expand these techniques in specific fields of study in order to make the results more precisely.
Full-text available
Getting cited is important for scholars and for the institutions in which they work. Whether because of the influence on scientific progress or because of the reputation of scholars and their institutions, understanding why some articles are cited more often than others can help scholars write more highly cited articles. This article builds upon earlier literature which identifies seemingly superficial factors that influence the citation rate of articles. Three Journal Citation Report subject categories are analyzed to identify these effects. From a set of 2,016 articles in Sociology, 6,957 articles in General & Internal Medicine, and 23,676 articles in Applied Physics, metadata from the Web of Knowledge was downloaded in addition to PDFs of the full articles. In this article number of words in title, number of pages, number of references, sentences in the abstract, sentences in the paper, number of authors and readability were identified as factors for analysis.
Full-text available
It has been suggested that the "visibility" of an article influences its citation count. More specifically, it is believed that the social media can influence article citations.Here we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of scholarly references in Wikipedia affects the citation trends. To perform this analysis, we introduced a citation “propensity” measure, which is inspired by the concept of amino acid propensity for protein secondary structures. We show that although citation counts generally increase during time, the citation "propensity" does not increase after inclusion of a reference in Wikipedia.
Full-text available
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a narrative review of studies on the citing behavior of scientists, covering mainly research published in the last 15 years. Based on the results of these studies, the paper seeks to answer the question of the extent to which scientists are motivated to cite a publication not only to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of scientific peers, but also for other, possibly non‐scientific, reasons. Design/methodology/approach – The review covers research published from the early 1960s up to mid‐2005 (approximately 30 studies on citing behavior‐reporting results in about 40 publications). Findings – The general tendency of the results of the empirical studies makes it clear that citing behavior is not motivated solely by the wish to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of colleague scientists, since the individual studies reveal also other, in part non‐scientific, factors that play a part in the decision to cite. However, the results of the studies must also be deemed scarcely reliable: the studies vary widely in design, and their results can hardly be replicated. Many of the studies have methodological weaknesses. Furthermore, there is evidence that the different motivations of citers are “not so different or ‘randomly given’ to such an extent that the phenomenon of citation would lose its role as a reliable measure of impact”. Originality/value – Given the increasing importance of evaluative bibliometrics in the world of scholarship, the question “What do citation counts measure?” is a particularly relevant and topical issue.
Full-text available
Analysis of 131 publications during 2006–2007 by staff of the School of Environmental Science and Management at Southern Cross University reveals that the journal impact factor, article length and type (i.e., article or review), and journal self-citations affect the citations accrued to 2012. Authors seeking to be well cited should aim to write comprehensive and substantial review articles, and submit them to journals with a high impact factor which has previously carried articles on the topic. Nonetheless, strategic placement of articles is complementary to, and no substitute for careful crafting of good quality research. Evidence remains equivocal regarding the contribution of an author's prior publication success (h-index) and of open-access journals.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Research needs to be explained clearly to others to colleagues, to educational bodies, and to the public by publications. There are various reasons for publication: 1- Publications help in spreading your knowledge and experience, 2- It gives you an academic profile and raises the profile of your institution, 3- Research publications create income for the University, ….. and 4- Publications strengthen your CV. Publishing a high quality paper in scientific journals is a halfway of receiving citation in the future. The rest of the way is advertising and disseminating the publications by using the proper “Research Tools”. Familiarity with the tools allows the researcher to increase his/her h-index in the short time. H-index shows the academicians influences in the specified field of research. Therefore, a person with higher level of h-index has more high quality publications with high amount of citations. This presentation, covers the following topics: Why publish and increase h-index?, Definition of h-index and g-index, Importance of h-index, How to use “Research Tools” Mind Map, Paper title preparation, Selecting keywords, Select the proper journal, Advertise published article, and finally Trace published article citation.
Full-text available
Title of an article can be descriptive, declarative or a question. It plays important role in both marketing and findability of article. We investigate the impact of the type of article titles on the number of citations and downloads articles receive. Number of downloads and citations for all articles published in six of PLoS (Public Library of Science) journals (2,172 articles) were obtained from PLoS and type of each article’s title (including descriptive, indicative and question) was determined as well as the number of substantive words in title (title length). Statistical difference and correlation tests were carried out. The findings showed that differences exist between articles with different types of titles in terms of downloads and citations, especially articles with question titles tended to be downloaded more but cited less than the others. Articles with longer titles were downloaded slightly less than the articles with shorter titles. Titles with colon tended to be longer and receive fewer downloads and citations. As expected, number of downloads and citations were positively correlated.