Strategic citations for a fairer academic landscape

Abstract

Scientific publishing is increasingly dominated by for-profit journals, which attract prestige and submissions through high impact factors (IF). While some of these partly reinvest in research and dissemination and can be considered academia-friendly, non-profit journals - those that fully reinvest revenue into the academic community - often struggle for visibility despite promoting more equitable publishing models. Using citation data from over 70,000 publications in ecology and evolution, we show that citation practices are siloed: for-profit journals disproportionately cite other for-profit journals, academia-friendly journals preferentially cite other academia-friendly journals, and non-profit journals likewise favor citations to non-profit sources. This asymmetry structurally reinforces the IF advantage of for-profit journals simply because they are dominant in the publishing system. To address this inequity, we propose a soft-power, low-risk approach of "strategic citation". By deliberately choosing to cite relevant articles from non-profit journals when multiple references would be equally valid, researchers can contribute to increasing those journals visibility and IF. This approach preserves scientific rigor and does not restrict publishing choices, but adds a layer of ethical intentionality to citation practices. Strategic citation offers a practical, actionable lever for researchers to promote a more balanced and ethical publishing system that complements broader structural reforms.