Document Type : Articles


University of Sarajevo


Interest in academic ranking systems increased substantially in the last two decades. The majority of existing ranking systems are highly exclusive and cover up to 1500 best-positioned world universities. An exception to these ranking systems is the Webometrics ranking, which ranks more than 31000 universities throughout the world. In this study, we wanted to examine what factors best predict the Webometrics rankings. The sample for this study consisted of 102 European universities, with the Webometrics ranks ranging from 18th position to 6969th position. We examined the effects of the number of Web of Science publications, Scopus publications, and ResearchGate-related data on Webometrics ranking. Data retrieved from the academic social network site ResearchGate predicted 72% of the variance in the Webometrics ranking. The number of Scopus publications was the single best determinant of whether the university will be positioned in the top 1000 ranked universities. These results indicate the potential use of ResearchGate scores in the rankings of universities and serve as a proxy for universities’ excellence. This, in turn, can be useful to government policymakers and university leaders in creating better strategies for enhancing the reputation of universities. 


  1. Acosta-Vargas, P., Ramos-Galarza, C., Salvador-Ullauri, L., Chanchi, G. E., & Jadan-Guerrero, J. (2020, 2020//). Improve Accessibility and Visibility of Selected University Websites. Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction, Cham.
  2. Ali, M. Y., Wolski, M., & Richardson, J. (2017). Strategies for using ResearchGate to improve institutional research outcomes. Library Review, 66(8/9), 726-739.
  3. Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côte, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377-386.
  4. Bhardwaj, R. K. (2017). Academic social networking sites. Information and Learning Science, 118(5/6), 298-316.
  5. Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., Walch-Solimena, C., & Ettl, C. (2011). Mapping excellence in the geography of science: An approach based on Scopus data. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 537-546.
  6. Copiello, S., & Bonifaci, P. (2018). A few remarks on ResearchGate score and academic reputation. Scientometrics, 114(1), 301-306.
  7. Erfanmanesh, M. A., & Didegah, F. (2013). A Comparison of Web of Science and Scopus for Iranian Publications and Citation Impact. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 11(1), 11-27.
  8. Goglio, V. (2016). One size fits all? A different perspective on university rankings. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38(2), 212-226.
  9. Henao-Rodriguez, C., Lis-Gutierrez, J.-P., Gaitan-Angulo, M., Vasquez, C., Torres, M., & Viloria, A. (2019). Determinants of ResearchGate (RG) Score for the Top100 of Latin American Universities at Webometrics. In Y. Tan & Y. Shi, Data Mining and Big Data Singapore.
  10. IBM. (2020). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows 27.0. In Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
  11. Joshi, N. D., Lieber, B., Wong, K., Al-Alam, E., Agarwal, N., & Diaz, V. (2019). Social Media in Neurosurgery: Using ResearchGate. World Neurosurgery, 127, e950-e956.
  12. Krstić, M., Filipe, J. A., & Chavaglia, J. (2020). Higher Education as a Determinant of the Competitiveness and Sustainable Development of an Economy. Sustainability, 12(16), 6607.
  13. Lepori, B., Thelwall, M., & Hoorani, B. H. (2018). Which US and European Higher Education Institutions are visible in ResearchGate and what affects their RG score? Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 806-818.
  14. Lovett, J. A., Rathemacher, A. J., Boukari, D., & Lang, C. (2017). Institutional repositories and academic social networks: Competition or complement? A study of open access policy compliance vs. ResearchGate participation. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 5(1), 1-35.
  15. Marusic, A., & Marusic, M. (1999). Small scientific journals from small countries: breaking from a vicious circle of inadequacy. Croatian Medical Journal, 40(4), 508-514.
  16. Memisevic, H., Pasalic, A., Mujkanovic, E., & Memisevic, M. (2019). In Search of a Silver Bullet: Evaluating Researchers’ Performance in Bosnia and Herzegovina. J. Sci. Res., 8(3), 125-130.
  17. Memisevic, H., Taljic, I., & Hadziomerovic, A. M. (2017). Making Use of H-index: the Shape of Science at the University of Sarajevo. Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 25(3), 187-190.
  18. Moed, H. F. (2017). A Comparative Study of Five World University Rankings. In H. F. Moed (Ed.), Applied Evaluative Informetrics (pp. 261-285). Springer International Publishing.
  19. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228.
  20. Nian Cai, L. (2009). The Story of Academic Ranking of World Universities. International Higher Education, 0(54).
  21. O’Brien, K. (2019). ResearchGate. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 107(2), 284-285.
  22. Orduna-Malea, E., Martin-Martin, A., Thelwall, M., & Delgado Lopez-Cozar, E. (2017). Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations? Scientometrics, 112(1), 443-460.
  23. Ovadia, S. (2014). ResearchGate and Academic Social Networks. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 33(3), 165-169.
  24. Shehatta, I., & Mahmood, K. (2016). Correlation among top 100 universities in the major six global rankings: policy implications. Scientometrics, 109(2), 1231-1254.
  25. Taylor, P., & Braddock, R. (2007). International University Ranking Systems and the Idea of University Excellence. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(3), 245-260.
  26. Torres-Samuel, M., Vasquez, C. L., Viloria, A., Varela, N., Hernandez-Fernandez, L., & Portillo-Medina, R. (2018, 2018//). Analysis of Patterns in the University World Rankings Webometrics, Shanghai, QS and SIR-SCimago: Case Latin America. Data Mining and Big Data, Cham.
  27. Van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature news, 512(7513), 126-129.
  28. Vieira, E., & Gomes, J. (2009). A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university. Scientometrics, 81(2), 587-600.
  29. Yan, W., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Research universities on the ResearchGate social networking site: An examination of institutional differences, research activity level, and social networks formed. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 385-400.
  30. Yu, M.-C., Wu, Y.-C. J., Alhalabi, W., Kao, H.-Y., & Wu, W.-H. (2016). ResearchGate: An effective altmetric indicator for active researchers? Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1001-1006.