High readership on academic social platforms could poorly reflect conservation interest

Abstract

Social media are being used increasingly by the science community to share research output with a wide audience and to seek feedback. They are also used as alternatives to the traditional citation-based assessment of the impacts of scientific products and even to inform employment decisions in academia. One of these media platforms, ResearchGate, is a popular application with more than 20 million users who share and discuss scientific products. We report on a remarkably high level of interest in one of our publications on ResearchGate about the Eurasian wild pig Sus scrofa in Iran, a poorly studied species in a conservation priority region. The number of reads of our publication was c. 1,500 times higher than the mean per publication for scientists from a range of American and Asian universities. Comparison with other ResearchGate statistics and reader feedback indicates these reads resulted from data-gathering processes unrelated to the details of the research. Although this raises questions regarding the ability of ResearchGate and similar platforms to measure research interest and impacts reliably, we use the popularity of our article as an opportunity to advocate for conservation research in an understudied region and on an understudied species.

Keywords

• Article influence
• bibliometrics
• biodiversity conservation
• Iran
• research bias
• ResearchGate
• social media
• Suidae