This is a research related question about what academics should do with ResearchGate (RG) scores. I came across an interesting, recent study by Orduna-Malea et al., (2017) about RG scores which reported that high RG scores cannot be achieved by publications alone but a score as high as, for example, 109.8 can be achieved with 0 publications by only answering questions (see screenshot attached). in comparison, 23 Nobel Prize winners that do not actively engage in answering questions but instead upload their publications only achieve a score from 54.18 to 44.58 (see screenshot attached). The authors conclude that RG scores should not be taken as indicators of academic reputation.
So the point is we should not use these scores to tell us about the academic influence of a researcher as other indicators might tell us. So what use if this RG score? On the surface it might seem to not be very useful. However, it might serve another purpose which is to increase the visibility of the researcher among the scientific community. More visibility is desired and sought through other means such as Twitter, media engagement and creating an own website or blog with content.
What's your opinion? Are RG scores useful to indicate academic reputation? Or are they to increase academic visibility? Or yet still are there other useful aspects of RG scores.
I look forward to your interesting answers!
Reference:
Orduna-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2017). Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations?. Scientometrics, 1-18.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications