The "components" may include: authorship (total publications), author rank (on individual publications), individual publication types (categories), reads, citations, profile views, followers, RG scores of followers, research feedback, questions, answers, and any other new criteria that you think might be important to include in the RG score calculation. For example, should publications and citations of senior-authored papers get the same weight as citations for lower author-rank publications?
Publications in high impact factor journals seems to be the important components..
I think citations of publications, followers, and RG scores of the followers should get higher weight in calculating RG score of a scientist.
I think the weighting of components used in the RG score calculation should be based on the following factors (in sequential order of importance, weight, or magnitude):
Number of:
1) Senior-authored publications
2) All publications (regardless of type), including weighting based on journal Impact Factor for journal articles (to assess quality of publications)
3) Citations
4) Profile views
5) Followers
6) RG scores of followers
7) Reads (of publications)
8) Questions/Answers (with feedback interactions, up-votes etc.)
The current unpublished formula for calculating RG scores does NOT use the weighting system (for components) outlined above. The purpose of the original question was to find out how other scientists think the component factors (in the RG calculation) should be weighted, not give their opinions about what components appear to have the greatest influence on RG scores now (using the current RG-calculation formula and methods).
I observed that there is no impact of citation and read on RG score. I also observed that publication in high impact factor journal is only influence the RG score.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers