I am faced with continued decrease of my RG without any explanation,
taken into account growing downloads,upvoting questiones,new questiones and participation into discussiones- etc – all components required for RG calculation ? Thank you in advance.
Dear Marianne,
Regarding the increase or stabilisation of RG scores, only two factors matter: impact points that provides a certain permanent sum of RG scores or the amount of up-votes that has only a temporary (for a week) effect thus you should always be present in threads and get more and more up-votes. This means that one should be a slave of RG activity if RG scores matter.
Dear Marianne,
Regarding the increase or stabilisation of RG scores, only two factors matter: impact points that provides a certain permanent sum of RG scores or the amount of up-votes that has only a temporary (for a week) effect thus you should always be present in threads and get more and more up-votes. This means that one should be a slave of RG activity if RG scores matter.
Hi Marianne, focus on your work and publications. Your score will automatically improve. Basically what it means is that you have to be academically productive.
Every time you publish (depends on the journal impact factor), there will be downloads, and your impact points will go up. RG scores fluctuates on weekly basis for everyone. However, it will not fluctuate too much for established researchers, It might fluctuate more for people who doesn't have much impact points or it might fluctuate more for those who purely rely on boosting their RG score in getting up-votes by answering questions.
So the bottom line is that, is it a concern for people who do not publish, but not for others who publish frequently in high impact journals. Those who publish frequently will establish a baseline, so it won't go negatively. For others, if they don't login for a month, it will go too low. I think this is how it works here!
Although Andras has provided a good answer, I wonder whether or not RG team strictly adheres to these principles he mentioned. I noticed that my score comes down in some weeks when I was even more active or had more up-votes.
RG score just reflected your weekly activity and in less manner, publications. If RG score has a primary importance for you, just answer more questions, participate in more discussion.
Dear Emeka,
I think the continuous uncertainty may be an efficient stimulation for the permanent presence in RG activity and this may be aim of the RG control mechanism.
The calculation of the RG Score remains a mystery to me as well. I'm retired so the RG score is irrelevant to me; I'm curious/concerned about it because many here are my friends and colleagues. And I always stand up for my friends.
It seems odd to me that questions and answers receive more weight than publications. One of my articles (and I'm sure one of yours as well) took more time and was more academically intensive than all my questions and answers combined.
I'm also puzzled by the question/answer weight or distribution. My few questions receive more weight than hundreds of answers. All the more puzzling since any of us can write a question in about five minutes. Substantive answers to discipline-related questions or general "deep" questions can take 30 to 45 minutes.
I have nearly 300 "followers" (that word sounds like I'm the head of some cult!). It seems to me that that is a fair number yet it doesn't factor into my RG score. I think a more reasonable procedure would allow for some "credit" for 50 followers and additional for each 50 thereafter.
The handling of publications is the most problematic for me in regard to my friends and colleagues. The question has been asked several times if RG score should be used for promotion/tenure/etc. considerations. RG factor can't be taken seriously in terms of publications because the process for listing them is a joke and the listing can be "padded" by the member. For example, one member listed dozens and dozens of "articles." I checked several and they turned out to be nothing more than "letters to the editor" type of writing of about 1/2 page posted (not published) on a news web site. Posted means that there is no editorial process, there is no checking of quality; anything submitted appears instantly on the web site.
Another example, a person has several hundred publications listed as "articles" or "data sets." Each one is a single slide from a PowerPoint presentation or a photo or a screen shot from a web site.
These people are in the minority but these bogus listings weaken the RG factor's validity for those of you with valid publications. Two things would help with that--quality and length. Quality cannot be considered because there are far too many disciplines represented for RG to determine quality. Determining length would at least address the case of the two people mentioned above (there are more than two). When you upload the file of a book to Amazon Kindle or Amazon CreateSpace (print books), their system determines the number of pages. RG should consider something similar, giving the page count for each publication uploaded. They could also have the system include items 6 pages and up under "Articles" while 5 pages and less would go in a slush pile called "Miscellaneous Junk." That would stop me from submitting anything that might end up in the "junk pile"!! :) I'm just kidding; it could be called "miscellaneous submissions."
The quality of a publication could be determined by members writing reviews on RG. But there is limited visibility to the "Write a Review" feature on RG. And there is little motivation to do so. I don't think reviews are counted in the RG score but they should be and the weight should be second only to published articles. These reviews handled in this way would benefit both the reviewer and the author of the article reviewed.
With these changes the RG score could become a valid tool for promotion/tenure considerations.
I've mentioned these under "Help/Suggestions" with no response. Those who might agree could add your voice to the effort. Perhaps several people making the same suggestions would carry some weight.
Colleagues,
I agree with the above accounts that journal (Thomson Reuters listed journals) impact points and constant activity answering questions are what sustains one's score. I checked out a few of your RG Scores and found that beyond a certain threshold, RG Scores level off, and there is precisely no variation in the scores after a RG Score of 54.0 is achieved; there is a certain point of academic success which is the same for all members regardless of their contributions.
In this chain we find six RG Scores from contributors to this discussion, but the meaning is mostly at the lower end of the score spectrum and no variation exists at the top.
The six scores are followed by the statement, "Your RG Score is higher than 00.0% of RG members'. Publishing in the Thomson Reuters list of journals is the fastest way to increase and hold your RG Score.
For example, in this discussion chain, RG Score = higher than % of RG members'
14.82 = higher than 55%...
17.04 = higher than 62.5%...
20.04 = higher than 70%...
37.26 = higher than 95%...
54.00 = higher than 97.5%...
105.68 = higher than 97.5%...
RG score does not indicate your research popularity at all. It is only a measure of your publications attached in RG and your involvement in Q&A section of RG. I think it will not reflect your standards and reach in any way. In my opinion, there is no need to bother much about the RG score. Please proceed your academic and research activities and use RG to popularise your findings.
@ Sudev,
I agree with you to some extend. 'RG score does not indicate your research popularity at all'. It is both true and not true.
There is a positive correlation between RG score and impact point. A true researcher with high RG score will have high impact point as well. Please look at some of my colleagues/collaborators:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/George_Chrousos
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bruce_Mcewen2
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dick_Swaab
If you happen to look at the googlescholar citations of researchers, it will be very high as well. For example, more publications, more downloads, and more citations. So, it does make real sense. They might have never answered or asked questions.
To give a different perspective, look at the profile of Prof. Ed Freeman, a collaborator of mine in googlescholar profile:
http://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=ZcvIxwsAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao
His one popular book has been cited nearly 20K times. He has tons of publications.
The scores of the above researchers are genuine. They are very busy individuals who may not have answered any questions here at RG. But still their RG score as well as impact points are high. The download of their publication is high. If in doubt, you have to google for someone's name, you can still see many information popping out.
The problem is this: There are many people with bogus RG scores, where the RG score is high, but no impact point at all. One can artificially inflate it to look significant.
@John, as John pointed out, there are many who inflate the scores by various means. Asking too many questions, answer anything and everything, posting powerpoint, posting news, half page or one page article as publication, etc. You're correct in that sense.
In summary, one can easily identify if they are true researcher or not by looking at their publications, RG scores, and impact points. RG also gives a clear picture on their interactions, how many questions they asked and how many questions they answered, etc. In fact, you don't have to have a domain experience to do this little research of your own! Click the RG score, it will give you the detailed stats...voila!!! Good luck!
There are a lot of good journals, however, where the impact points are not calculated in RG scores because they are not listed in Thomson Reuters.
I fully agree that ReasearchGate has made it very easy to make one's work available to the entire world.
Services like Google Scholar and ResearchGate have created a new Renaissance in information access and sharing and they have flattened the world in terms of making every researcher's work visible to scholars the world-over. This guarantees diversity of thought and reduces the circle of concentrated opinions from dominating the landscape.
One way to make RG Scores more accurate (or less bogus) is to account for the thousands of journals not listed in Thomson Reuters by scoring them by their Google Metrics h5-index score. Google Metrics has a much broader list of journals and accounts for a very broad range of quality journals.
Many journals not listed in Thomson Reuters have higher h5-index scores than many journals that are listed.
Here is the link to Google Metrics:
https://scholar.google.ca/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en
Active participation and continuity will help! Try not to give long breaks!
One of the important contributions of RG is the publications of articles under dataset . In the era of online science , every researcher is permitted to publish his research work as dataset . The downloads & views of this work would highlight the significance of the researcher's contribution . It is not possible for every researcher to publish their work in high impact journals . It is also not possible to access many of the articles , as they are paid journals . Articles in good journals which are available in Pubmed , are also not available in Thomson Reuters . In addition , the concept of Alternate Metrics ( Altmetrics ) which considers views , downloads , citations & impact factors are crucial to determine the quality of the article , rather than just impact factor . The Q & A is an important forum to discuss many aspects of science , such as this discussion & helps to arrive at a consensus of how scientific contribution should be evaluated .
There is an explanation how RG is calculated, and as stated in the previous answers you should regularly do some common activities that influence RG. Of course, if this is the most important issue!
However, in my opinion, the main strength of RG is in helping people with useful comments and suggestions, sharing ideas, starting collaborations, and making your work more visible. In last few months I have got several very useful answers on my questions, which helped me in my work. Simply, work and enjoy, this is the most important score!
RG is an excellent platform for like-minded people to intellectually interact and benefit from global experiences and opinions. RG score is a number without any influence on the careers of RG members. Enjoy your participation and get benefited!
По моему мнению RG вообще не важно. Главное что у нас появилась возможность оперативного обмена научных данных и возможность общения с коллегами со всего земного шара. Вот это самое важное. Остальное это просто чувство собственной важности не более...
RG itself has given an explanation about method of an evaluation and calculation of RG score. However, it is true that some time the score get reduced perhaps on withdrawal of followers, down-voting of poor content of answers given etc. though, it is true that you have to remain active on RG by answering or asking questions, following some other researchers, producing good quality research and get it published in good quality on-line journals etc. your citation index is also greatly matters in increasing RG score.
Yes, Dear Rajeswara Rao,
RG has no influence on one's career, rather it is the reputation among RG members. One should increase the participation actively, ask questions, answers, discuss, upvotes, etc. on continuous basis.
Dear Prof. Subhash
I am of the view that even reputation in RG groups is not influenced by the RG score.
Dear Dr. Rajeswara Rao,
You are very correct. I also did not feel and find such influence.
Hey! Take it easy. Many people answered your question.
It depends on many factors like publications especially more publications more impact points, their downloads, citations, questions you posed, answers (your interaction answering the questions), public views about your profile, followers, your skills and their endorsements and the information about yourself. Along with this up vote and down vote about your views. Go and click on RG Score you get all information. Every week they send statistical information about RG score.
Active participation in RG is one way to improve RG score. If electricity is kept cut off several times/day or night (as what happenned in my town last week & is expected to continue in the next week), then the RG score will go down (mine decreased 0.02 last week). RG score is like life with its ups & downs!
P.S.: In our region , cutting electricity frequently is the norm & this ruins electric equipment. I think that the monitor, in front of me now, may say good-bye any time very soon (!) which may mean absence from RG until fixing the problem.
If I remember correctly, I got also one decrease, that was very small.
The aim of RG is to motivate researchers to participate in RG & the incentive is RG score . If it declines it reminds the researcher to keep on participating . It is a personal matter for the researcher , as they would not like a decline in their score , The Q & A segment is very valuable to the researchers , as publications can be uploaded to justify the answers & leads to a healthy discussion . It also allows interaction of researcher of various other branches on various issues confronting science , such as impact factor of journals . I consider this as an important contribution of RG . It has given significance to other factors , rather than only to impact factor .
We should at least thank the RG score for one thing, it has become a hot topic on RG.
Dear B.R. Rajeswara Rao and Subhash,
It is hot even too hot but not useful. Its mere usefulness is practicing our English and getting some points.
Dear Prof. Bozsik
Yes, I agree and we made this clear in several posts.
The other topic often discussed on RG is down voting which pulls down the score though minimally.
So the more I participate in discussions like this, the better my RG Score will be? "Hmmm, seems like a worthy pursuit of reputational excellence!"
@ Paul
Giving is another form of taking
When we help others in their areas of research, we automatically learn, enrich and enlarge our horizons. Knowledge is an invisible universe.
More we participate, more we give our ideas; more we gain in terms of knowledge, excellence, relationship, collaboration, RG score, etc.
Now RG has a little changed. Views and downloads are merged under heading "Reads". I don't know how it will affect the score!
The same happened to me, but don't think too much on it.
Any organization with millions of members has to have frequent re-adjustments so that criteria apply to all. They are not God judging you. I am sure they are trying to be fair, but that is an immense task to carry out.
I get the inference [because RG has included a category in the new wheel-chart display for your score that was recently deployed], that they have a plan for somehow integrating the reputations of your "followers" into the formula for calculating your score ... but this apparently has not been operationalized ... yet.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Applied Mathematics
- Calculations