Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the study aims to investigate the relationship between the altmetric indicators from ResearchGate (RG) and the bibliometric indicators from the Scopus database. Second, the study seeks to examine the relationship amongst the RG altmetric indicators themselves. RG is a rich source of altmetric indicators such as Citations, RGScore, Impact Points, Profile Views, Publication Views, etc. Design/methodology/approach – For establishing whether RG metrics showed the same results as the established sources of metrics, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated between the metrics provided by RG and the metrics obtained from Scopus. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were also calculated for the metrics provided by RG. The data were collected by visiting the profile pages of all the members who had an account in RG under the Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh (India). Findings – The study showed that most of the RG metrics showed strong positive correlation with the Scopus metrics, except for RGScore (RG) and Citations (Scopus), which showed moderate positive correlation. It was also found that the RG metrics showed moderate to strong positive correlation amongst each other. Research limitations/implications – The limitation of this study is that more and more scientists and researchers may join RG in the future, therefore the data may change. The study focuses on the members who had an account in RG under the Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh (India). Perhaps further studies can be conducted by increasing the sample size and by taking a different sample size having different characteristics. Originality/value – Being an emerging field, not much has been conducted in the area of altmetrics. Very few studies have been conducted on the reach of academic social networks like RG and their validity as sources of altmetric indicators like RGScore, Impact Points, etc. The findings offer insights to the question whether RG can be used as an alternative to traditional sources of bibliometric indicators, especially with reference to a rapidly developing country such as India.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to carry out an altmetric analysis of faculty members and research scholars of Department of Physics and Astrophysics, University of Delhi (India) (Univ.Delhi P&A) who are members of the academic social networking site ResearchGate. ReserachGate is a rich source of altmetric indictors such as publications, reads, profile views, citations, impact points, RGScore, followers and following, etc. The RGScore, unique to ResearchGate, was further explored in depth in the study. Design/methodology/approach The data were collected manually by visiting the profile pages of all the members who had an account in ResearchGate under Univ.Delhi P&A during the first week of July, 2016. The authors found a total of 173 members in ResearchGate from the department. Data were collected for publications, reads, profile views, citations, impact points, RGScore, followers and following from the profile pages of the members. Correlations were calculated amongst the metrics provided by ResearchGate to seek the nature of the relationship amongst the various ResearchGate metrics. Findings The analysis revealed that the publications added by researchers to their profiles were relatively low, as 28.32 per cent of the members had not added even a single publication to their profiles. Average reads acquired per person was found to be 909.49 and the median value of reads was found to be 95. Average citation per member in ResearchGate was found to be 414.60 and the median value was found to be 7. Majority of the researchers (45.09 per cent) had impact points in the range of 0.2-50. Most of the members (35.84 per cent) had followers in the range of 1-10. Majority of the members (52.02 per cent) had profile views in the range of 1-100. Most of the members (26.01 per cent) had RGScore equivalent to 0.01. The highest correlation of RGScore was found with publications added by researchers to their profiles, followed by correlation between RGScore and reads, correlation between RGscore and profile views, correlation between RGScore and number of Full Texts and correlation between RGScore and number of followers of a researcher. Originality/value Not much research has been conducted in the area of altmetrics, especially using ResearchGate as a source of altmetrics. The findings of the study help in understanding the validity of ResearchGate as a source of altmetrics for research evaluation in a developing country such as India. Also, the novel ResearchGate indicator RGScore has been evaluated in great depth and its relationship with other ResearchGate altmetric and bibliometric indicators has been established.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose – Social media has given way for the development of various new altmetric indicators. Mendeley readership count is one such indicator. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the paper aims to investigate the relationship between citation counts and Mendeley readership counts. The paper also evaluates the relationship between Mendeley readership metrics for two different time periods, thereby investigating its nature as an altmetric indicator. Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected using the Scopus database. Top 100 papers in Physics published during 2005 as well as in 2010 that received the largest number of citations were selected. Mendeley readership data were collected using Mendeley readership statistics for documents indexed in Scopus. For establishing a relationship between citation counts and Mendeley readership, correlation was calculated between the citations in Scopus database and Mendeley readership. The difference in Mendeley readership for different time periods was also investigated. Findings – The paper showed that for both the years, Mendeley readership counts were in positive correlation with citation counts. For the year 2010, it was found that Mendeley readership counts were in strong positive correlation with citation counts, whereas for 2005, they were in moderate positive correlation. Research limitations/implications – One of the limitations of this paper is that with time more scientists and researchers may join Mendeley causing various changes in data and giving different results. Also, the paper has focused on the highly cited papers in Physics. Originality/value – Very few studies have been conducted in the area of altmetrics, as it is a comparatively new and emerging field of research. The findings of this paper offer insights to the question whether Mendeley readership counts can be used as an alternative to traditional sources of bibliometric indicators like citations, h-index, etc. The paper also evaluates the difference in the nature of traditional bibliometric indicators and Mendeley readership counts.