I am reviewing a survey paper in a good journal, where the paper missed important papers in the field including my previously published articles. I plan to suggest a rejection due to this serious lack, but I want also to encourage the authors to resubmit it again by pointing out the weaknesses of their paper.

In addition, I want to recommend them to cite some papers (since it is a survey paper) including my own. I don't know whether this is ethical (because I am one of the authors and it is clear that I found them interesting).

  • 1
    Since you say it's a survey paper and you plan on recommending rejection I think this isn't a duplicate. Yet there are a few related questions: 1) Is asking an author I'm reviewing to cite me a conflict of interest?, 2) Suggesting connection to one's own paper in a referee report, 3) Is it a common practice for reviewers to recommend their own papers in the review?
    – Anyon
    Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 2:15
  • 3
    As per @Anyon links and the answers herein: you were invited to review the paper as an expert in the field. You were considered an expert due to your publications in the topic. Ergo, it's natural that your papers will have much in common/be complementary to the reviewed paper. Via such a reasoning, not citing the relevant papers is a flaw. I've reviewed papers that from the first submission cited a number of my own - it's natural, though.
    – user68958
    Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 7:34
  • 4
    @corey979 And this is specifically a survey paper. If you're asked to review a survey, it's because you're an expert in the field being surveyed, so something has gone wrong if you're not mentioned. Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 10:10

3 Answers 3


My personal rule for this is that I go ahead and suggest the paper in my review, and in the "Notes to the Program Chair/Editor" I disclose that I am suggesting a paper of my own.

That way, I am covered on both fronts: I am suggesting papers that are relevant to the authors and I let the Editor decide whether it is a fair suggestion.


It is absolutely fair to expect the authors of survey and review papers to conduct a proper literature search of the field. Then they can either limit their scope in a way that excludes certain papers, or be prepared to respond to questions why they didn't reference them. Note that if the scope is limited they might be justified in leaving out your papers, but they should make it clear what their intended scope is.

Suggesting one's own papers during peer review is fine, assuming they're actually related, and not just an attempt to fish for citations. Austin Henley's recommendation to be upfront to the editor about which papers are yours is helpful here. You also want to be careful not to write a report that comes across as petty, e.g., "You didn't cite my paper X? Reject it is." Instead, I generally prefer phrasing my objections as questions: "Could the authors clarify why they didn't consider (list of papers)?" rather than demands: "The authors should cite these papers otherwise the manuscript can't be accepted".

This way it's up to the authors to convince me that what they're doing is reasonable. It's possible they have good reasons after all - maybe there is a sentence mentioning their scope that I somehow missed? If they can't provide a good reason, it is still a friendlier message, and allows them an easy way out. (The tactic is even more useful for technical issues, where it lets one avoid "the referee is wrong" responses.)


I generally hate the "cite this" remarks of the reviewers, they are also mostly fully obvious in breaking the review blindness.

That one time when I absolutely had to highlight my own paper in the review (I was not aware of other research doing things exactly as I needed to make the point), I briefly restated the claim ("you state confidence of 90% with technique A, but there was research that did it with 99% confidence with technique B") and then went on to say that the reference is available to the editor.

In the confidential notice to editor I stated the full citation, mentioned that it is obviously co-authored by me, and that I leave it to their judgement whether to communicate this citation to the authors.

Probably not the best way to boost my citation count, but definitely ethically clean.

  • 2
    I don't really agree with you. Citations are not only used to mention the source of information but also to a wide view of the state-of-the-art and similar work. If the paper (especially survey papers) addresses a problem/research topic and does not mention similar work, reviewers would take the responsibility for drawing the authors' attention to the missed papers. Here, I am not talking about one specific paper, but a collection of papers that address the same problem.
    – Yacine
    Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 17:10
  • 2
    Do you also hate "cite this" remarks when the paper under review is a survey, whose only purpose is to cite and put in perspective other works? A survey can hardly be useful if it misses chunks of the literature. It's probably even harmful.
    – user9646
    Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 19:44
  • Both commenters are right, my focus was on research papers. Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 19:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .