Abstract
The academic social networking site ResearchGate (RG) allows members to post refereed papers and non-refereed preprints on the service. RG provides service-specific metrics and altmetrics for authors and publications posted on the service such as Reads, Citations, Recommendations, h-index, and RI Scores. This paper identifies problems based on a review of examples of questionable practices, which raises concerns about the lack of transparency and the validity of RG's metrics and altmetrics to assess scientific reputation. The paper describes a scheme that small groups of researchers use to deliberately inflate each other's metrics on RG. Additionally, a comparison is made between an unethical physics researcher's RG metrics and those of several Physics Nobel Laureates. Based on the problems found, the paper proposes several corrective actions RG could implement to mitigate metrics fraud on the service.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call