Are there too many papers by the same authors within the same conference proceedings? Norms and extremities within the field of human–computer interaction

Frode Eika Sandnes ()
Additional contact information
Frode Eika Sandnes: Oslo Metropolitan University

Scientometrics, 2025, vol. 130, issue 3, No 14, 1659-1699

Abstract: Abstract A substantial portion of computer science research is published in conference proceedings. An academic conference allows researchers to meet, network, learn, exchange ideas, seek inspiration and share their experiences and findings. This study was triggered by an impression that some authors publish several papers within the same conference, sometimes filling an entire session. Such back-to-back presentations by the same author can be monotonous to witness. This study therefore set out to assess if this repeat author impression is supported by empirical evidence. An analysis was performed based on Scopus data for 31 key conferences within human–computer interaction. The results indeed confirm the phenomenon of repeat authors within conference proceedings. The maximum number of papers with the same author was six contributions based on the conference median, that is, in 16 of the 31 conferences at least one author was listed as co-author on at least six contributions. In the most extreme instance one author was listed on 32 contributions within the same conference. Papers by repeat authors often shared similar contents. The multiple co-author phenomenon was prominent in both highly ranked conferences as well conferences with a lower rank. Conference chairs (gatekeepers) were overrepresented among authors with multiple papers as more than 50% of gatekeepers across 23 of 31 conferences had more than one contribution within the conference they organised. An analysis of a large multi-conference showed that publishing across different proceedings volumes under the same conference umbrella is common and that such multi-authorships are obfuscated from the statistics if considering each volume in isolation. Implications of this study is that conference organisers should draw attention towards the overall author profile and consider ceilings on the number of papers permissible for each author. Moreover, organizers should reflect over the appropriateness of themselves publishing (many) papers within their own conferences.

Keywords: Research productivity; Academic reputation; Conference experience; Conference quality; Paper quality; Peer-review quality; Multi-conference; Hyperprolific authors; Gatekeepers (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I21 I23 I28 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-025-05271-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05271-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-025-05271-9

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().