Researchers more than others are profiled based on their citations following different schemes. However, when comparing numbers between RG and Google Scholar we find a mismatch. To what extent you are satisfied seeing these differences. Will you report your RG or your Google Scholar if asked to provide a reference?
I am satisfied with the performance of RG in terms of citations
Actually, because of the difference in the delay at RG, I contacted the administration at RG, and simply the response was they are working on the matter. This has been couple of years ago.
RG has performed satisfactorily. It must be noted that RG and Goggle Scholar uses different feeds and tracking systems for keeping track of citations, accounting for their difference.
What I have noticed is that RG excludes self citations while Google Scholar reports all citations thus Google Scholar reports more citations than RG
Good observations my dear colleagues. For the last two years I am following on RG progress and it seems they are networking further and therefore able to keep updated.
Comparatively, Google Scholar is faster than RG in terms of citations tracking.
I think that RG depends mainly on articles uploaded by the researchers while Google Scholar depends mainly on articles uploaded by the journals.
One area where RG is still weak is the follow up for Patent citations. Up till today I did not see any increase or improvement to track them as compared to Google Scholar.
However, Google Scholar is still mostly used as a reference for researchers.
Yes Dr. Lezzaik, I believe so. The RG is continuously developing and I have seen this first hand.
RG is a social network, so it only records citations that are found within the network. On the other hand GS searches the internet to find your citations, no matter where they are. For most of us , GS scores much higher than RG, and GS is (at least in Croatia) relevant for your scientific career while RG is not.
RG tracks more citations for some papers while in some cases citations tracked by Google Scholar are more.
Total number of citations for all papers are found to be more in Google scholar as compared to RG.
I agree with Ashok, it is difficult to compare. However, for a scholae or researcher both are doing good job.
Though I have observed that either RG or Google Scholar still are missing certain citations. The reason, Do not know!!
They are similar, but Google Scholar does not have Reads, Recommendations, and Q&A that is available in RG.
Websites cannot capture everything, but I have very few missing Publications and Citations in either outlet.
Yes Michael, I observed the same points. Though, Google Scholar is faster in detecting new publications.
Google Scholar shows which papers have been cited, and where, in a clear and meaningful way, as well as the h-index and i10-index, for All years and for the past 5 years.
RG calculates the h-index, but it can only be viewed by clicking on "Scores", which suggests that the h-index is not taken as seriously as it is on Google Scholar.
Besides, RG does not follow on Patents from the citations detection point of view.
Thank you Chia-Lin for your clear input. On the other hand, Dr. Lezzaik I have such a situation, where my patent is well supported in citations in Google Scholar but not on RG.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations