What is more important in Research Gate, interacting with other researchers, or posting publications?
We could assess the scientific impact of the researcher by the number of: publications, reads, citations (with or without auto-citations?).
The number of reads is the urgency of the research topic. The number of citations is the significance of the researcher's particular publications.
Further, if we take the ratio of citations to reads, we can estimate the value of the researcher's contribution as a whole.
Is auto-citation good or bad? It's a question! If no one else works in this field, then there is no one to cite. And maybe this topic will become relevant later.
What about publications which are not indexed in the Scopus or the Web of Science! The RG assigns a garbage rating to them. But are they really not valuable? It's a question! After all, the publication in the Scopus for scientists from developing countries is much expensive... Whether are such scientists less clever and creative or not, than those who have a bigger salary? I am not so sure.
Posting publications is important for knowledge dissemination to wider audience. Interaction with other researchers is also vital for cross fertilization of ideas, collaborations and better research
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications