Coercive citation: understanding the problem and working toward a solution

Academic publishing has faced numerous ethical challenges, but reviewer conflict of interest (COI) and potential associated coercive citation requests present an under-explored area of concern. Although we expect most reviewers to act ethically, the drive for academics to increase their citation counts creates a potential incentive for reviewers to seek citations of their own work, presenting a potential reviewer COI. With citation counts serving as an important part of most university and journal rankings, the integrity of the research review process has far-reaching implications. This study analyzes journals' communication to reviewers regarding coercive citation requests and COIs in general, with 205 survey responses from editors of major management or marketing journals, and an assessment of a randomly selected subset of 30 leading journal websites. The majority of journals did not discuss reviewer coercive citation requests or COIs, nor have any obvious processes to screen for it. We discuss the factors that foster an environment conducive to coercive citation requests and identify easily adoptable changes to review formats to address the problem. We also discuss the need to examine the triad of relationships among authors, reviewers, and editors, taking a systems approach. We encourage attention to balance of power and cocreation.