![]() Science and engineering indicators, chapter 5: Academic research and development. Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for earth sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105–2125. Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. ![]() López-Illescas, C., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Moed, H. The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era. Larivière, V., Haustein, S., & Mongeon, P. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 997–1004. The place of serials in referencing practices: Comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities. Larivière, V., Archambault, É., Gingras, Y., & Vignola-Gagné, É. Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines. Epistemic cultures: Forms of reason in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 284–294. Coverage and overlap of the new social sciences and humanities journal lists. Information Processing and Management, 35(1), 31–44. A bibliometric study of reference literature in the sciences and social sciences. Les dérives de l’évaluation de la recherche: du bon usage de la bibliométrie. Web of Science and Scopus: A journal title overlap study. A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in nursing. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Coverage of business administration literature in Google Scholar: Analysis and comparison with Econbiz, Scopus and Web of Science (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Comparing unique title coverage of Web of Science and Scopus in Earth and atmospheric sciences. Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. ![]() Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1320–1326. ![]() Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: A comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. The bibliometric community should continue its efforts to develop methods and indicators that include scientific output that are not covered in WoS or Scopus, such as field-specific and national citation indexes.Ībrizah, A., Zainab, A. These results imply that in the context of comparative research evaluation, WoS and Scopus should be used with caution, especially when comparing different fields, institutions, countries or languages. As a consequence, the results of bibliometric analyses may vary depending on the database used. While both databases share these biases, their coverage differs substantially. Similarly, English-language journals are overrepresented to the detriment of other languages. Results indicate that the use of either WoS or Scopus for research evaluation may introduce biases that favor Natural Sciences and Engineering as well as Biomedical Research to the detriment of Social Sciences and Arts and Humanities. To do this we compared the coverage of active scholarly journals in WoS (13,605 journals) and Scopus (20,346 journals) with Ulrich’s extensive periodical directory (63,013 journals). The objective of this research is to describe the journal coverage of those two databases and to assess whether some field, publishing country and language are over or underrepresented. Most bibliometric analyses have in common their data sources: Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science (WoS) and Elsevier’s Scopus. Bibliometric methods are used in multiple fields for a variety of purposes, namely for research evaluation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |