I have received many times negative RG score for some weeks even when I interact every time with my peers in my fields. Does it mean that this is randomly calculated or where does this negative score come from.
I get negative score even when I interact with people. Ofcourse, I would not just interact when there is no need. I checked on the research coming out of people in my field and try to see what is the latest idea from their end and how is my recent work inline.
Even if one reduced his/her interaction, I still do not know why RG score should be negative. The worse should be 0.0. This is my view unless someone has another point of view on the explicit reason or perhaps explicit formular that will result in negative score.
I think this is due to the fact that ResearchGate tries to lure you into being more active. Certainly some people take the RG score very seriously and when they see that their score is decreasing they try to be more active.
My major concern is how do we quantify activeness in that sense. For me, being active means I check regularly when some people publish paper in my field and then I will download to go through the paper and keep myself updated. Also, I could request a paper if it is not open access. Yet, you could still have negative score that week. I do not have problem having my score going up and down but if the research gate admin claim they are measuring scientific impact of research works, then I do not know if this is true representation.