Abstract
Although institutional affiliation is not mandatory in scholarly publishing, a new trend of multiple and simultaneous affiliations, which I will call “octopus affiliations” or “octaffiliations” in short, is increasingly noticeable as a distorted consequence of academic ranking and evaluation systems. Institutions offer financial and/or technical supports to authors whose contributions are, in turn, used as a hallmark of productivity, influence, visibility and reputation of their affiliations at national and international levels. While it is understandable that an author can be affiliated with one or two institutions at a time, multiple and simultaneous affiliations, on the other hand, would be hardly realistic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Dance, A. (2017). Flexible working: Solo scientist. Nature,543(7647), 747–749.
Glänzel, W., & de Lange, C. (2002). A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics,54(1), 75–89.
Hottenrott, H., & Lawson, C. (2017). A first look at multiple institutional affiliations: a study of authors in Germany, Japan and the UK. Scientometrics,111(1), 285–295.
Moustafa, K. (2015). Aberration of the Citation. Accountability in Research,23(4), 230–244.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moustafa, K. Octopus affiliations. Scientometrics 124, 2733–2735 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03600-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03600-8