Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science

Bakkalbasi, Nisa; Bauer, Kathleen; Glover, Jan; Wang, Lei

doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7

Cited by 614 publications

(467 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

421

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Schroeder (2007), comparing the same two tools, gives a comprehensive overview of studies comparing Google Scholar and Web of Science. In a comparative study of Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science, Bakkalbasi et al (2006) conclude that each of these tools has strengths in specific disciplinary searches. A behavioural study comparing Metalib with Google Scholar (Nygren et al, 2006) shows how students' preference for convenience leads to Google Scholar being their first choice.…”

Section: Enriched Information Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Search engines and the production of academic knowledge

Dijck

2010

International Journal of Cultural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

• This article argues that search engines in general, and Google Scholar in particular, have become significant co-producers of academic knowledge. Knowledge is not simply conveyed to users, but is co-produced by search engines’ ranking systems and profiling systems, none of which are open to the rules of transparency, relevance and privacy in a manner known from library scholarship in the public domain. Inexperienced users tend to trust proprietary engines as neutral mediators of knowledge and are commonly ignorant of how meta-data enable engine operators to interpret collective profiles of groups of searchers. Theorizing search engines as nodal points in networks of distributed power, based on the notions of Manuel Castells, this article urges for an enriched form of information literacy to include a basic understanding of the economic, political and socio-cultural dimensions of search engines. Without a basic understanding of network architecture, the dynamics of network connections and their intersections, it is hard to grasp the social, legal, cultural and economic implications of search engines. •

show abstract

Section: Enriched Information Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Search engines and the production of academic knowledge

Dijck

2010

International Journal of Cultural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In several case [14,17] in which, for example, the scientific productivity of an author is described by the number of publications, citations and H-index, it is important to understand their sources, because the same variables may take different values if they are obtained via Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar or other disciplinary databases. In literature, there are also some papers in which the journal coverages of the various fields of these databases are compared [2,16,35] . In the greater part of these cases, although exceptions are made for medical sciences and some hard sciences, none of these is thoroughly exhaustive or representative.…”

Section: Indexes and Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten challenges in modeling bibliographic data for bibliometric analysis

Ferrara

Salini

2012

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The complexity and variety of bibliographic data is growing, and efforts to define new methodologies and techniques for bibliometric analysis are intensifying. In this complex scenario, one of the most crucial issues is the quality of data and the capability of bibliometric analysis to cope with multiple data dimensions. Although the problem of enforcing a multidimensional approach to the analysis and management of bibliographic data is not new, a reference design pattern and a specific conceptual model for multidimensional analysis of bibliographic data are still missing. In this paper, we discuss ten of the most relevant challenges for bibliometric analysis when dealing with multidimensional data, and we propose a reference data model that, according to different goals, can help analysis designers and bibliographic experts in working with large collections of bibliographic data.

show abstract

“…These findings were corroborated by the results of Vaughan and Shaw (2008) for information science. Bakkalbasi, Bauer, Glover, and Wang (2006) compared citation counts for articles from 11 oncology journals and 11 condensed matter physics journals published in 1993 and 2003. They found that for oncology in 1993, Web of Science returned the highest average number of citations (45.3), Scopus returned the highest average number of citations for oncology in 2003 (8.9), and Web of Science returned the highest number of citations for condensed matter physics in 1993 and 2003 (22.5 and 3.9, respectively).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation counting, citation ranking, and h‐index of human‐computer interaction researchers: A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science

Meho

Rogers

2008

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

314

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR-a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that h scores should be manually calculated instead of relying on system calculations.

show abstract

Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science

Cited by 614 publications

References 22 publications

Search engines and the production of academic knowledge

Search engines and the production of academic knowledge

Ten challenges in modeling bibliographic data for bibliometric analysis

Citation counting, citation ranking, and h‐index of human‐computer interaction researchers: A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About