H-Index is only about scientific impact and calculated considering only the documented publications, while RG inputs some other roles and impacts such as moral roles (participation in questions and answers) and teaching activities and etc.
Which index can be better especially for the future of the science?
It all depends on the relative values of different individuals and institutions: which index is better or worse is a function of what one values more or less. Since different individuals and organizations have different value systems, they will see as "better" different indices.
The RG score is based on publications, participation in questions and answers and number of followers.
I can't see where the "moral role" is???
I like and have been using RG for 6 years; it has numerous benefits for researchers, but the RG score is heavily skewed by the questions, answers and number of followers..... in that sense, the more popular you and your views are, the higher your score. Does that measure accurately a person's standing in the scientific/research community?
For instance, my RG score is bound to increase this week after this answer (i don't answer questions that often).
Have i made a contribution to science? I would argue NO.
Dear colleagues
Thank you for your answers.
Although participation and try to answer others questions is not straightly and always shows moral role, but this part has not any effects in any other indices. I mean this view.
Regards
If i understand your answer correctly, i agree. The H-index does not take into account things like collaboration and outreach at both social and academic levels. RG is trying but i don't think it has been very successful thus far.... as predicted, my RG score went from 7.62 to 7.99.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching