Hi, without proper details, it is difficult to address the specifics.

In general, papers perform poorly both in terms of reading and getting citations.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/23/academic-papers-citation-rates-remler/

There are so many variables that you have to taken into consideration:

a. reputation of the authors - first vs senior author - popularity, h-index

b. reputation of the publishers - standard vs predatory, indexed vs non-indexed

c. reputation of the journal - journal impact factor

d. results - local implications vs. global implications, what is the novelty in your research?

e. how hot the area in question - emerging ideas vs established concepts, meta-analysis, systematic review, novel findings, etc.

f. number of scientists working on in this area (less= possible to get less citations; too many= still possible to get less citations as they would cite high impact authors/papers).

and the list can go on.

What can you do about it, when it comes to your own paper?

You should have a good network (people in communication) within the area of your research. Communicate and share your work, i.e. send them copy of your work in question. Share in various social media platforms. If the work is really good, you don't have to ask people to take it or cite it. It will happen automatically. If you're still not sure, you could collaborate with some established scientists who have high impact. If your work is convincing, most certainly, they might agree as well! So, all boils down to one single big question: Is your work is so impressive enough that people are dying to cite your paper? i.e. ask yourself, why should someone cite your paper? Always, start with a good work. There shouldn't be any negotiation with regards to the quality of the work.

I hope you understand the bigger picture!

thank you

pandi

http://pandi-perumal.blogspot.com

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/23/academic-papers-citation-rates-remler/

I have a book chapter which has been read 3,800 times on ResearchGate but has only two citations. However, by checking the Stats breakdown, you realize that the full text has been read only 1,400 times. The first thing you might want to check, is how many full text reads did your research paper have?

The next thing is because of the nature of my book chapter, people who read it are probably undergraduate and graduate students researching for an assignment. Although this service is very important, it is less likely to translate into citations. Therefore, you need to check the primary audience of your research paper, are they active researchers or not?

I will give another example. Last year, I published two papers of the same type at almost the same time. To date, one has more than 10 citations and the other 2 (self-citations, since we extending on the work). The difference between the two papers was one was in a hot topic and the other in a highly specialized area.

The other reasons you may want to consider as well are:

1. Accessibility - can active researchers easily access your paper?

2. Easy to find - can active researchers find your manuscript in reliable databases such as Web of Science and SCOPUS?

3. Trustworthiness - is the research paper published in a reliable journal (researchers often avoid publications in predatory journals)?

Citation counting is a black hole, not clearly understood by many. Why citation counts vary for the same researcher's productivity in various databases, such as Research Gate, Google scholar and SCOPUS? Whereas one database includes the citations to the books, another database excludes the citations to the books. Even the same database may include the citations to the books for one researcher, and exclude the citations to the books for another researcher. All depends on the algorithmic manipulations of the databases, which are kept secret.

I'm not sure if we can say citation counts by indexing databases are kept secret. ResearchGate counts citations according to papers uploaded to ResearchGate. It doesn't differentiate between citations from books, journal articles and even predatory journals. Google Scholar is not a database as such but a search engine which searches the entire web. For an article to be considered a academic paper by Google Scholar it needs to follow a format which is clearly stated on its FAQ. Citation counts by reputable databases such as SCOPUS, SCI, SCIE, and SSCI only counts those from publications that they have evaluated and approved. It is citation counts from these databases that should really matter to anyone who thinks citation counts are important.

Hi, without proper details, it is difficult to address the specifics.

In general, papers perform poorly both in terms of reading and getting citations.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/23/academic-papers-citation-rates-remler/

There are so many variables that you have to taken into consideration:

a. reputation of the authors - first vs senior author - popularity, h-index

b. reputation of the publishers - standard vs predatory, indexed vs non-indexed

c. reputation of the journal - journal impact factor

d. results - local implications vs. global implications, what is the novelty in your research?

e. how hot the area in question - emerging ideas vs established concepts, meta-analysis, systematic review, novel findings, etc.

f. number of scientists working on in this area (less= possible to get less citations; too many= still possible to get less citations as they would cite high impact authors/papers).

and the list can go on.

What can you do about it, when it comes to your own paper?

You should have a good network (people in communication) within the area of your research. Communicate and share your work, i.e. send them copy of your work in question. Share in various social media platforms. If the work is really good, you don't have to ask people to take it or cite it. It will happen automatically. If you're still not sure, you could collaborate with some established scientists who have high impact. If your work is convincing, most certainly, they might agree as well! So, all boils down to one single big question: Is your work is so impressive enough that people are dying to cite your paper? i.e. ask yourself, why should someone cite your paper? Always, start with a good work. There shouldn't be any negotiation with regards to the quality of the work.

I hope you understand the bigger picture!

thank you

pandi

http://pandi-perumal.blogspot.com

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/23/academic-papers-citation-rates-remler/

Edmund's point is well taken. The details provided by him also explain what I intended to state. Citation counting game is akin to the story of six blind men describing an elephant. Each may be partly right, but all were wrong.

@ Edmund.

With regards to book chapters, researchers usually prefer not to cite it. This is because, it is customary that people will not write a 'breaking news' as a book chapter. That means, the original information must be available somewhere as a paper. People usually prefer, original references, reviews, and then book chapter in that order - if that is necessary to cite a chapter. Additional issue is, reference databases (e.g. endnote), requires manual input if we want to include chapter as references in our paper. Until otherwise, it is absolutely necessary, people avoid citing chapters. Certainly, the authors can self-cite if there is a need.

Of course, there is always a discrepancy with regards to the calculation of h-index.

See for example, see google scholar vs. researchgate:

https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=MO90ZXkAAAAJ&hl=en

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Seithikurippu_R_Pandi-Perumal/scores

SCOPUS and ORCID (or other databases) can be linked:

https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=7801638271

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8686-7259

If the databases are owned by a publisher, that will show different results than non-publisher databases.

Finally, citation counts are of course important for scientists for very many reasons. At the same time, it might not be an issue for an academician who's job involves more of administrative work or teaching assignments. One has to check with their affiliated institutions. It is not an individual choice. If you're a researcher, you're already in the game!

If someone wants to get hired or expect to get a promotion or a salary hike, they will take various things into considerations. Looking their h-index in one of these database will certainly give a quick snapshot of who they are! That will give a base for further exploration!

Yes, there are so many things wrong everywhere! That said, we have to start somewhere! where would that be?

To have good and prominent network to get citations and co-citations of common works within it.

Try also to adopt a good strategy in your research activity to expand your audience in different journals including chapters in edited books by self-citing adequately your own work.