Several papers have been published about this subject, but I think should be interesting to open a discussion between the RG users.
In my opinion, the first step is to make transparent the algorithm used to calculate this parameter and to pay more attention to the scientific productivity evaluation. This should be differentiated according to the disciplinary sector. It is also important to appreciate both quantity and quality of the publications, particularly taking into account the research areas. In certain studies is possible to have spendable results only after several years.
RG score use principally the JIF system based on Thomson Reuters WoK database, but we know that to many journals are not ranked by TR nor some particular types of scientific contributions (conference papers, books, chapters, etc.). In these aspects RG could and should improve too much.
Any metric is both good and bad at the same time. Here you write: "It is also important to appreciate both the quantity and quality of the publications, particularly taking into account the research areas." But even if we reach an ideal situation and ask an expert scientist in a specific scientific field to evaluate an article or a job, two experts will have two different assessments, with which the third expert may disagree.
My point is that the RG scores adequately reflect the contribution of a particular user of the site to the development of this site. And we had to not expect from this RG score more.
Personally for me RG - it's a platform where you can communicate, read interesting articles, ask questions (very specific for Google or Yandex).
Yes, I agree with you and I know very well the problem of discordant opinions between referees.
In any case, the problem is that any research project call requires the participants to produce a CV with a bibliography of his best contributions which will be evaluated.
For this, bibliometric indicators and tools for their determination are increasing importance from the financial and economic point of view.
Dear Prof.Antonio Pirisi,
This is the good topic. I think RG score now became a potential parameter for scientific reputation, and RG score also includes conference papers. However, it is important to have a good assessment system quality of the questions.
Dear Colleague,
In my opinion questions and answers should not be taken into account to measure the scientific reputation.
Their only function should be to evaluate how much each researcher is actively in the RG.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals