Is repeated citations from the same region a cause for concern?

Question

I have just accepted a paper for reviewing for a journal in neuroscience. While skimming through the paper, it appeared that the authors had heavily cited literature originating from the country where the authors are from. Since then I have carefully read through the Introduction and most of the Discussion section and I am quite convinced that this is so. There also appears to be a tendency of self citation, although it is hard to be certain.

To be clear, the paper has nothing to do with any specific region of the world and there are other papers (from diverse regions) that the authors could have cited but have chosen not to (whenever the authors are throwing in an example citation of the ilk: "...many studies have shown that xyz is quite common (Citation)".

My questions:

1. Are there tools that can return the affiliation information (specifically the country and additional information like ORCID iD), given a list of references? I would like to see whether my intuition about the possible citation bias is correct (and if so, perhaps mention it to the editor)

2. Should this be a matter of concern? I am quite new to peer review and I feel that wherever possible, the references should be diverse (once again, to clarify, the paper has nothing to do with a specific region of the world and that there are other studies which the authors could have cited)

Answer 1

Well, yes, the citations should cover relevant literature no matter where it originated. I wouldn't worry too much about tracking where the authors are or are from.

Simply note that there are many possible references missing (perhaps provide some), and note which seem excessive. It would be easy to imagine that the authors have been closely following work in their own country and are building on it appropriately.

I would give the authors a round to review their citations before approaching the editor. While I'm sure it's not your intent, it would be easy to come off prejudiced here.

Answer 2

As someone who has received similar (valid) criticism literally last week - it's not necessarily malicious, might be just a lack of effort with finding relevant and more globally visible literature on the topic (such as papers with more citations) instead of relying on own or known from local collaborations/conferences work.

Good way to go about it is to cite it as a concern in your review and suggest improving this part.

If a reviewer is familiar enough with the topic and knows most major groups working on it, they might provide an example (e.g. "authors cite a tangentially related work X while a much more well-known work Y deals with the subject directly"). But this is not required, either.

My suggestion is cite this concern of yours in the review as a suggestion for improvement and let the editor handle it from there on.

Answer 3

What language are the cited papers in? It's possible that some of the authors find it easier to read papers in their native language and that's why they mostly choose those in cases where there are multiple options. I wouldn't find that concerning, as long as the underlying information is fine.