Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Knowledge and Information Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22054/dcm.2022.69557.1147

Abstract

Purpose

Accurate scientific evaluation of researchers by ResearchGate network is still ambiguous. This systematic study seeks to shed some light on this issue.

Methods

The study was conducted with a systematic review of the previous studies (articles or reports). The analysis of documents was performed with a targeted keyword search in the reputable Google Scholar, Emerald, and PubMed databases (without limit). Titles and abstracts (if necessary, full texts) of the number of 582 documents (Persian, English, and Spanish) were retrieved (1-10 April 2021) and studied. Then, by removing duplicate or irrelevant data, 57 independent studies were selected for replying to the main research problem of this systematic review (using the PRISMA statement). For drawing diagrams, Excel software was used.

Findings

Among 57 previous independent studies that retrieved by systematic review, 30 of them, had a negative attitude towards the ResearchGate. The numbers of 27 studies have seen with positive approach from standpoint the concepts of "authentic measuring instrument", " presence of prominent scientists such as Nobel Prize recipients", "valid scientific content", and "having a significant relationship with the academic ranking criteria", and "compliance with the Hirsch indicator", that identified by documentary analysis based on PRISMA statement. Studies with a positive assessment to the ResearchGate, dealing with developing countries, and with a small investigated research community. Therefore, it is appropriate to act cautiously when evaluating researchers with the ResearchGate network.

Originality

No similar systematic review to evaluate the ResearchGate network from the standpoint of a scientific suitable evaluation tool, so far.

Keywords

Main Subjects