Our university use h-index calculated via Scopus but this company uses only articles having DOI number that are accepted in ORCID. ORCID had limited for article printed in Persian language and also does not accept all articles with DOI number. While RG and Google scholar acted all cases explained above. Is that possible to convince Scopus and Google Scholar to have similar policy for at least accepting articles with DOI number?
Dear Gholam Ali Ranjbar ,
I am afraid there is some confusion about a number of matters you address. First of all, Scopus uses only journals indexed in their (own) database for the calculation of the h-index.
Though papers published in journals by the well-established publishers like Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley etc. (almost always having) a DOI, this is by itself not enough to be indexed in Scopus (see enclosed file for the most recent list of indexed titles).
The difference you observe between the h-index as calculated by Scopus, RG and Google Scholar is primarily due to the difference in the databases. As said Scopus only uses journals (and some chapters of books) indexed in their own database, RG uses (primarily) journals (but also chapters, conference papers, thesis, etc.) included in their own database while Google Scholar uses basically everything their search engine can find on the internet.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Best regards.
PS. ORCID is working independently from Scopus. As far as acceptance in ORCID is concerned you might consider Zenodo to add a doi to papers when the journal did not do this. See also: https://support.orcid.org/hc/en-us/articles/360006973133-Add-works-to-your-ORCID-record
Dear Gholam Ali Ranjbar ,
I am afraid there is some confusion about a number of matters you address. First of all, Scopus uses only journals indexed in their (own) database for the calculation of the h-index.
Though papers published in journals by the well-established publishers like Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley etc. (almost always having) a DOI, this is by itself not enough to be indexed in Scopus (see enclosed file for the most recent list of indexed titles).
The difference you observe between the h-index as calculated by Scopus, RG and Google Scholar is primarily due to the difference in the databases. As said Scopus only uses journals (and some chapters of books) indexed in their own database, RG uses (primarily) journals (but also chapters, conference papers, thesis, etc.) included in their own database while Google Scholar uses basically everything their search engine can find on the internet.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Best regards.
PS. ORCID is working independently from Scopus. As far as acceptance in ORCID is concerned you might consider Zenodo to add a doi to papers when the journal did not do this. See also: https://support.orcid.org/hc/en-us/articles/360006973133-Add-works-to-your-ORCID-record
The performance metrics (Citation/H-Index/Reads and RG score) of RG platform is of no use officially. There are platforms similar to RG popping up. Any one can add articles/documents manually to maneuver citations in this database. Scopus database (addition of articles and citations) is strictly based on indexed journals/Patents/books/book Chapters and Conference proceedings. Google Scholar is an unbridled horse that can jump in any direction and add any thing found in the web. Therefore, no coordination can be reached or needed between these platforms. Scopus metrics is officially considered in the realm of academics for all purposes.
It is a common problem as we are seeing .Always there is asynchronosation in between their indexing policy.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Zoology
- Ornithology
- birds
- Scopus