基于Google Scholar和ResearchGate的学者绩效评估可信度研究

IF 1.2 4区 管理学 N/A HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Scholarly Publishing Pub Date : 2023-05-02 DOI:10.3138/jsp-2022-0076
Y. Takefuji
{"title":"基于Google Scholar和ResearchGate的学者绩效评估可信度研究","authors":"Y. Takefuji","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholar performance evaluation plays a key role in management science and engineering. Scholar evaluation using Google Scholar and ResearchGate can serve as an indispensable scouter for evaluating scholar performance. Both tools to quantitatively evaluate scholars can be used to support evidence-based decision making in administration and human resources. However, both tools must be used together for complementing accurate scholar evaluation. Tis author shows examples of fatal drawbacks in Google Scholar and ResearchGate, respectively. Scopus and Publons, used as default scholar performance, are afected by publisher-bias selection of journals and conferences. Te author recommends scholar performance evaluation using both tools such as Google Scholar and ResearchGate together with Scopus and Publons.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Credibility on Scholar Performance Evaluation Using Google Scholar and ResearchGate\",\"authors\":\"Y. Takefuji\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/jsp-2022-0076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholar performance evaluation plays a key role in management science and engineering. Scholar evaluation using Google Scholar and ResearchGate can serve as an indispensable scouter for evaluating scholar performance. Both tools to quantitatively evaluate scholars can be used to support evidence-based decision making in administration and human resources. However, both tools must be used together for complementing accurate scholar evaluation. Tis author shows examples of fatal drawbacks in Google Scholar and ResearchGate, respectively. Scopus and Publons, used as default scholar performance, are afected by publisher-bias selection of journals and conferences. Te author recommends scholar performance evaluation using both tools such as Google Scholar and ResearchGate together with Scopus and Publons.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0076\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0076","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学者绩效评估是管理科学与工程领域的核心问题。使用Google Scholar和ResearchGate对学者进行评估可以作为评估学者表现不可或缺的侦察员。这两种定量评估学者的工具都可以用于支持行政和人力资源方面的循证决策。然而,这两种工具必须一起使用,以补充准确的学者评估。作者分别举例说明了Google Scholar和ResearchGate的致命缺陷。Scopus和Publons作为默认的学者绩效,受到期刊和会议的出版商偏倚选择的影响。作者建议使用Google scholar和ResearchGate等工具以及Scopus和Publons进行学者绩效评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Credibility on Scholar Performance Evaluation Using Google Scholar and ResearchGate
Scholar performance evaluation plays a key role in management science and engineering. Scholar evaluation using Google Scholar and ResearchGate can serve as an indispensable scouter for evaluating scholar performance. Both tools to quantitatively evaluate scholars can be used to support evidence-based decision making in administration and human resources. However, both tools must be used together for complementing accurate scholar evaluation. Tis author shows examples of fatal drawbacks in Google Scholar and ResearchGate, respectively. Scopus and Publons, used as default scholar performance, are afected by publisher-bias selection of journals and conferences. Te author recommends scholar performance evaluation using both tools such as Google Scholar and ResearchGate together with Scopus and Publons.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
15.40%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: For more than 40 years, the Journal of Scholarly Publishing has been the authoritative voice of academic publishing. The journal combines philosophical analysis with practical advice and aspires to explain, argue, discuss, and question the large collection of new topics that continually arise in the publishing field. JSP has also examined the future of scholarly publishing, scholarship on the web, digitization, copyright, editorial policies, computer applications, marketing, and pricing models. It is the indispensable resource for academics and publishers that addresses the new challenges resulting from changes in technology and funding and from innovations in production and publishing.
期刊最新文献
Crossing Between Clinical Work and Scholarly Publishing: Early-Career Neurosurgeons as Clinician-Researchers The Ethics of Scholarly Book Reviewing On Editor’s Instructions to Manuscript Reviewers Unraveling the Attributes of Productive Scholars in Social Science Fields: A Study of Chinese Scholars Publishing in Top-Tier International Journals The Conceptual ‘APC Ring’: Is There a Risk of APC-Driven Guest Authorship, and Is a Change in the Culture of the APC Needed?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1