Match!

Scholarly Reputation Building: How does ResearchGate Fare?

Published on Dec 31, 2016in International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology
· DOI :10.5865/IJKCT.2016.6.2.067
David Nicholas39
Estimated H-index: 39
,
Eti Herman12
Estimated H-index: 12
,
David Clark8
Estimated H-index: 8
Abstract
  • References (26)
  • Citations (7)
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
78% of Scinapse members use related papers. After signing in, all features are FREE.
References26
Newest
#1Mike Thelwall (University of Wolverhampton)H-Index: 65
#2Kayvan Kousha (University of Wolverhampton)H-Index: 23
The large multidisciplinary academic social website ResearchGate aims to help academics to connect with each other and to publicize their work. Despite its popularity, little is known about the age and discipline of the articles uploaded and viewed in the site and whether publication statistics from the site could be useful impact indicators. In response, this article assesses samples of ResearchGate articles uploaded at specific dates, comparing their views in the site to their Mendeley readers...
37 CitationsSource
#1Min Chun Yu (KUAS: National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences)H-Index: 1
#2Yen-Chun Jim Wu (NTNU: National Taiwan Normal University)H-Index: 24
Last. Wen Hsiung Wu (KMU: Kaohsiung Medical University)H-Index: 1
view all 5 authors...
Abstract As research performance becomes increasingly important for academic institutions in competition for rankings, student recruitment, and funding, many performance indicators have been developed to measure various aspects of research performance. ResearchGate combines bibliometrics and altmetrics to create a more comprehensive performance measure for researchers and institutions. The ResearchGate score, the flagship indicator calculated by an undisclosed algorithm, is a metric that measure...
48 CitationsSource
#1Hamid R. Jamali (Kharazmi University)H-Index: 28
#2David Nicholas (Newbury College)H-Index: 39
Last. Eti Herman (Newbury College)H-Index: 12
view all 3 authors...
Structural changes to the scholarly environment are taking place as a result of the introduction of Web 2.0 technologies, which have given rise to Open Science 2.0 initiatives, such as open access publishing, open data, citizen science, and open peer evaluation systems. In turn, this is leading to new ways of building, showcasing, and measuring scholarly reputation through emerging platforms, such as ResearchGate. The article reports the findings of a survey of the opinions and practices of 251 ...
26 CitationsSource
#1David Nicholas (Ciber)H-Index: 39
#2Eti Herman (Ciber)H-Index: 12
Last. Stéphanie PouchotH-Index: 1
view all 7 authors...
The article reports on a study of the views and actions of nearly a hundred scholars – mostly academic researchers from four European countries and four disciplines – in regard to scholarly reputation in the Science 2.0 age. It specifi cally looks at the role that ‘emerging’ reputational mechanisms and platforms are playing in building, maintaining, and showcasing scholarly reputation in the digital age. Popular examples of such platforms are ResearchGate and Academia.edu. Data were obtained thr...
19 CitationsSource
#1Katherine Jordan (OU: Open University)H-Index: 1
This paper presents a response to the paper ‘A critical look at the ResearchGate score as a measure of scientific reputation’. Following up on arguments presented by the authors, which argue that the ResearchGate score is irreproducible and dependent upon Journal Impact Factors, a small-scale exploratory analysis of ResearchGate scores was undertaken to examine correlations between ResearchGate score and profile metrics. The importance of the Journal Impact Factor in determining ResearchGate sco...
11 Citations
#1Peter KrakerH-Index: 9
#2Elisabeth Lex (Graz University of Technology)H-Index: 10
In this paper, we present an assessment of the ResearchGate score as a measure of a researcher’s scientic reputation. This assessment is based on well-established bibliometric guidelines for research metrics. In our evaluation, we nd that the ResearchGate Score has three serious shortcomings: (1) the score is intransparent and irreproducible, (2) the score incorporates the journal impact factor to evaluate individual researchers, and (3) changes in the score cannot be reconstructed. Therefore, w...
17 CitationsSource
#1Judit H. Ward (RU: Rutgers University)H-Index: 2
#2William Bejarano (RU: Rutgers University)H-Index: 1
Last. Anikó DudásH-Index: 1
view all 3 authors...
This article aims to point out emerging roles and responsibilities for academic librarians with the potential of better integrating the library in the research process. In order to find out how to enhance the online reputation and discoverability of individual faculty members as well as their affiliated institutions, the authors worked side-by-side with researchers in the United States and Europe to explore, create, revise, and disambiguate scholarly profiles in various software applications. In...
19 CitationsSource
#1Mike Thelwall (University of Wolverhampton)H-Index: 65
#2Kayvan Kousha (University of Wolverhampton)H-Index: 23
ResearchGate is a social network site for academics to create their own profiles, list their publications, and interact with each other. Like Academia.edu, it provides a new way for scholars to disseminate their work and hence potentially changes the dynamics of informal scholarly communication. This article assesses whether ResearchGate usage and publication data broadly reflect existing academic hierarchies and whether individual countries are set to benefit or lose out from the site. The resu...
141 CitationsSource
Apr 1, 2015 in WI (Web Intelligence)
#1Robert Winter (HSG: University of St. Gallen)H-Index: 36
Dr. Ijad Madisch is co-founder and CEO of ResearchGate, the professional network for scientists and researchers to collaborate, share results, and speed up progress. Following his own frustrations as a researcher isolated in his lab, Ijad Madisch founded ResearchGate in 2008 together with his friends, fellow physician Soren Hofmayer and computer scientist Horst Fickenscher. ResearchGate has since grown to include more than six million scientists around the world. Ijad Madisch earned his doctorat...
2 CitationsSource
ResearchGate (RG) has emerged as one of the first private social networks for researchers and developers. It adds many new features and activities to the normal Online Social Networks (OSNs). One of these services is the question/answer environment where users can share their queries and obtain answers. This service is considered very important for expertise sharing in RG. In this work, the question/answer platform of RG is studied. A web-crawler has been implemented in order to harvest the ques...
11 CitationsSource
Cited By7
Newest
#1Weiwei Yan (WHU: Wuhan University)H-Index: 1
#2Yin Zhang (KSU: Kent State University)H-Index: 1
Academic social networking sites are important communication tools commonly used by scholars. In order to obtain an understanding of how scholars at US higher education institutions utilize these sites, this study took ResearchGate (RG) as an example and collected data from 168,059 users from 61 US higher education institutions at three research activity levels as defined by the Carnegie Classification. A hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted, and four clusters of institutions with differe...
2 CitationsSource
This study investigates the information seeking behavior of faculty and graduate students in the sciences of food and health. We compare three food science research sources through quantitative and qualitative research methods of interviews, observational studies, and surveys. We aimed to discover what motivates scientists’ information seeking, how they search, what barriers they experience, and how they critically evaluate information sources. We explored faculty perceptions of literature revie...
Source
#1Sergio Copiello (Ca' Foscari University of Venice)H-Index: 7
The scholarly social network ResearchGate (RG) started promoting a new composite indicator: Research Interest. That score is built upon a weighting scheme of citations, recommendations, full-text reads, and other reads by RG members. Here I show that the indicator suffers from, at least, two significant issues, which undermine its utility as an alternative metric. Lack of transparency is the former since there are clues that its underlying algorithm is more complex than what is known according t...
Source
#2Eti HermanH-Index: 2
Last. David NicholasH-Index: 39
view all 4 authors...
Source
#1Dong Qin (Xi'an Jiaotong University)H-Index: 2
#2Chenxu Wang (Xi'an Jiaotong University)H-Index: 5
Last. Yiming Jiang (Xi'an Jiaotong University)H-Index: 1
view all 3 authors...
The development of the Web 2.0 technology has brought the prosperity of open science which is devoted to making scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society, amateur or professional. One of the challenges faced by open science is how to build the scholarly reputation of participants credibly and fairly. Existing academic social networking services use peer reviews to address this problem. However, there are still some drawbacks of these services. T...
2 CitationsSource
#1Sumit Kumar Banshal (South Asian University)H-Index: 5
#2Vivek Singh (BHU: Banaras Hindu University)H-Index: 28
Last. Belém Priego Sánchez (UAM: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana)H-Index: 2
view all 5 authors...
5 CitationsSource
Determining the presence and visibility of companies on specialized platforms is the main objective of this chapter. To this end, we selected three platforms that cover three dimensions of company activity: Research (Google Scholar), innovation (Google Patents), and communication (Google News—Blogs). For each of these platforms we extracted the URL mention and title mention for our sample of 184 companies from the biotech industry. The results show, on the one hand, the differences in orders of ...
Source
ABSTRACTTo stimulate debate, the following commentary discusses the limitations of Dr. Locascio’s results blind manuscript proposal evaluation.
8 CitationsSource