Google Scholar: the pros and the cons

By P. Jacsó. Online information review (Print), 2005

405 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Science Applications

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bcbc0c094c045c1d40e70d378bb689aca4c15d38

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Science Applications

Citations in the corpus

Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research (2007, background): “org, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Blackwell, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA), Emerald, HighWire Press, Ingenta, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), PubMed, Sage, Springer, Taylor & Francis, University of Chicago Press, and Wiley, among others (Bauer & Bakkalb”
Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis (2008, background): “(3) Jacsó (2006b, p. 303) refers to a search he did to locate articles from The Scientist. He says the first item was an article about molecular biology in The Scientist, cited 7390 times. Our search does not return this item about molecular biology. The most cited paper in The Scientist was a 1986 ”
Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases (2018, neutral): “2017; Mingers and Meyer 2017; Aguillo 2012; Orduña-Malea and Delgado López-Cózar 2014; Jacsó 2005, 2008, 2012; Orduna-Malea et al.”
Bibliometrics to webometrics (2008, background): “Other studies with wider disciplinary coverage have also shown that the coverage of Google Scholar is variable and can be low or particularly unreliable for some disciplines [37, 38].”
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, background): “of Google Scholar. A general impression obtained from the literature is that Google Scholar suffers from a lack of quality control. Many inaccuracies in Google Scholar are reported in the literature. Jacsó (2005, 2006, 2010) for instance discusses problems related to content gaps, incorrect citation”
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007, methodology): “For more details on Scopus, see Goodman and Deis (2005) and Jacsó (2005a).”
Evidence for the network perspective on organizational learning (2008, neutral): “In a number of papers, Jacso (2005a, pp. 208-214; 2005b, pp. 1537-1547) has reviewed”
Continuous Online Evaluation of Recommendation Strategies in Social Science Academic Search (2026, unknown): “Besides large cross-disciplinary search portals for publications [34, 53], there are numerous academic search engines that focus on specific domains, such as bio-medicine [78], natural sciences [24], humanities [70, 74], economics [17, 84], and computer science [79, 46].”