A Critical Look at the ResearchGate Score as a Measure of Scientific Reputation

@inproceedings{Kraker2015ACL,
  title={A Critical Look at the ResearchGate Score as a Measure of Scientific Reputation},
  author={Peter Kraker and Elisabeth Lex},
  year={2015}
}
In this paper, we present an assessment of the ResearchGate score as a measure of a researcher’s scientic reputation. This assessment is based on well-established bibliometric guidelines for research metrics. In our evaluation, we nd that the ResearchGate Score has three serious shortcomings: (1) the score is intransparent and irreproducible, (2) the score incorporates the journal impact factor to evaluate individual researchers, and (3) changes in the score cannot be reconstructed. Therefore… Expand

Figures from this paper

Exploring the ResearchGate score as an academic metric: reflections and implications for practice
This paper presents a response to the paper ‘A critical look at the ResearchGate score as a measure of scientific reputation’. Following up on arguments presented by the authors, which argue that theExpand
A few remarks on ResearchGate score and academic reputation
TLDR
The will to understand the rationale behind theRG score should also consider the ratio between full-text sources uploaded to the repository and publications, which supports the claim that the RG score is not a reliable indicator of scientific and academic reputation. Expand
ResearchGate: Reputation uncovered
TLDR
RG provides a rich, albeit confusing, amount of reputational data; struggles with the deployment of alternative, engagement metrics, such as Q&A and follower data; and leads the field in the way it engages with the scholar. Expand
Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations?
TLDR
The results suggest that high RG Scores are built primarily from activity related to asking and answering questions in the site, and it seems impossible to get a high RG Score solely through publications. Expand
Research Interest: another undisclosed (and redundant) algorithm by ResearchGate
TLDR
The scholarly social network ResearchGate started promoting a new composite indicator: Research Interest, which is built upon a weighting scheme of citations, recommendations, full-text reads, and other reads by RG members but suffers from two significant issues, which undermine its utility as an alternative metric. Expand
Modeling and Prediction of the Impact Factor of Journals Using Open-Access Databases
  • M. Templ
  • Computer Science
  • Austrian Journal of Statistics
  • 2020
TLDR
It is demonstrated that the WoS impact factor of SCI listed journals can be successfully estimated without using the Web of Science database and therefore the dependency of researchers and institutions to this popular database can be minimized. Expand
Scholarly Reputation Building: How does ResearchGate Fare?
TLDR
Using a newly developed conceptual framework of the tasks and activities that comprise today’s digital scholarly undertaking and their potentially reputation building, maintaining and enhancing components, the efforts of ResearchGate in supporting scholars’ reputation building endeavours were put under the microscope. Expand
Indicators of scientific impact: The need for a tectonic shift
The proliferation of research witnessed in the past couple of decades has increased the need for distinguishing the impact of publications. As it could take a long time for a scientific finding to beExpand
ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impact
TLDR
It is shown that ResearchGate is dominated by recent articles, which attract about three times as many views as older articles and has low to moderate positive correlations with both Scopus citations and Mendeley readers, which is consistent with them tending to reflect a wider audience than Scopus‐publishing scholars. Expand
Altmetrics: State of the Art and a Look into the Future
The development of alternative indicators (altmetrics) can be traced back to a discussion a few years ago where the central question was: does the focus on classical bibliometric indicators stillExpand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-8 OF 8 REFERENCES
The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age
TLDR
This work compares the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009 to bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. Expand
How Community Feedback Shapes User Behavior
TLDR
It is found that negative feedback leads to significant behavioral changes that are detrimental to the community, and the authors that receive no feedback are most likely to leave a community. Expand
Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics
TLDR
Zehn Grundsatze um Forschung zu bewerten, drangen Diana Hicks, Paul Wouters und Kollegen einiges zusammen wirkt. Expand
Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network
In 2011, Emmanuel Nnaemeka Nnadi needed help to sequence some drug-resistant fungal pathogens. A PhD student studying microbiology in Nigeria, he did not have the expertise and equipment he needed.Expand
Modeling Trust Context in Networks
  • Sibel Adali
  • Computer Science, Engineering
  • SpringerBriefs in Computer Science
  • 2013
TLDR
This book reviews the components of the trust context through a broad review of recent literature in many different fields of study to study trust in applications increasingly incorporate new interdependencies and new trust contexts. Expand
Offenheit und wissenschaftliche Werke: Open Access, Open Review, Open Metrics, Open Science & Open Knowledge
This article analyses the concepts of openness in several contexts as Open Access, Open Access to Research Data, Open Science, Open Review & Open Metrics.
Show me the data.
An accessor hand mechanism includes a carrier frame rotatably mounted on a base, a pair of parallel slide shafts fixed to the carrier frame, and first and second sliders slidably mounted on the slideExpand