Abstract:Purpose The study's main purpose is to scrutinize Google Scholar profiles and find the answer to the question, “Do authors play fair or manipulate Google Scholar Bibliometric Indicators like h-index and i10-index?” Design/methodology/approach The authors scrutinized the Google Scholar profiles of the top 50 library and science researchers claiming authorship of 21,022 publications. The bibliographic information of all the 21,022 publications like authorship and subject details were verified to identify accuracy, discrepancies and manipulation in their authorship claims. The actual and fabricated entries of all the authors along with their citations were recorded in the Microsoft Office Excel 2007 for further analyses and interpretation using simple arithmetic calculations. Findings The results show that the h-index of authors obtained from the Google Scholar should not be approved at its face value as the variations exist in the publication count and citations, which ultimately affect their h-index and i10 index. The results reveal that the majority of the authors have variations in publication count (58%), citations (58%), h-index (42%) and i10-index (54%). The magnitude of variation in the number of publications, citations, h-index and i10-index is very high, especially for the top-ranked authors. Research limitations/implications The scope of the study is strictly restricted to the faculty members of library and information science and cannot be generalized across disciplines. Further, the scope of the study is limited to Google Scholar and caution needs to be taken to extend results to other databases like Web of Science and Scopus. Practical implications The study has practical implications for authors, publishers, and academic institutions. Authors must stop the unethical research practices; publishers must adopt techniques to overcome the problem and academic institutions need to take precautions before hiring, recruiting, promoting and allocating resources to the candidates on the face value of the Google Scholar h-index. Besides, Google needs to work on the weak areas of Google Scholar to improve its efficacy. Originality/value The study brings to light the new ways of manipulating bibliometric indicators like h-index, and i10-index provided by Google Scholar using false authorship claims.

Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: the popularization of bibliometric asessment

H Index of scientific Nursing journals according to Google Scholar Metrics (2007-2011)

Google Scholar as a Data Source for Research Assessment

Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses

Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison

Google Scholar: the 'big data' bibliographic tool

Ranking journals: Could Google Scholar Metrics be an alternative to Journal Citation Reports and Scimago Journal Rank?

Google Scholar Metrics 2014: a low cost bibliometric tool

Google Scholar Metrics evolution: an analysis according to languages

The Google scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators

Evaluating Scholars’ Impact and Influence: Cross-sectional Study of the Correlation Between a Novel Social Media–Based Score and an Author-Level Citation Metric

The counting house: measuring those who count. Presence of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics and Altmetrics in the Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley & Twitter

H Index of History journals published in Spain according to Google Scholar Metrics (2007-2011)

Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar

The Top 2,000 Cited Articles in Critical Care Medicine: a Bibliometric Analysis.

A new methodology for comparing Google Scholar and Scopus

The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences: An exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute

Using Google Scholar to predict self citation: A case study in Health Economics

Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: simple, easy and tempting

Can we use Google Scholar to identify highly-cited documents?

Do authors play fair or manipulate Google Scholar h-index?