%0 Journal Article %A Wren, Jonathan D %A Valencia, Alfonso %A Kelso, Janet %+ The Minerva Research Group for Bioinformatics, Department of Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Max Planck Society %T Reviewer-coerced citation: Case report, update on journal policy and suggestions for future prevention : %G eng %U https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0004-BD63-8 %R 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz071 %D 2019 %8 15.09.2019 %* Review method: peer-reviewed %X A case was recently brought to the journal’s attention regarding a reviewer who had requested a large number of citations to their own papers as part of their review. After investigation of their most recent reviews, we found that in every review this reviewer requested an average of 35 citations be added, ∼90\% of which were to their own papers and the remainder to papers that both cited them extensively and mentioned them by name in the title. The reviewer’s phrasing strongly suggested that inclusion of these citations would influence their recommendation to the editor to accept or reject the paper. The reviewer was unable to provide a satisfactory justification for these requests and Bioinformatics has therefore banned them as a reviewer. Our investigation also suggests that the reviewer has behaved similarly in reviewing for other journals. This case has alerted us to how the peer-review system is vulnerable to unethical behavior, and prompted us to clarify the journal’s policy on when it is appropriate for reviewers to request citations to their own work, and to suggest how some of the current weak points in the peer-review system can be mitigated, so that this behavior can be detected more quickly and efficiently. %J Bioinformatics %V 35 %N 18 %& 3217 %P 3217 - 3218 %@ 1367-4803