Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar

By Lokman I. Meho, Kiduk Yang. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2007

1,104 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c8bad3f510224e5cb010ca422149bf6ebcaa1d7f

How researchers see this paper

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

In Artificial Intelligence

In Information Systems

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Bibliometrics to webometrics (2008, background): “The findings showed that Google Scholar was probably too difficult to use for a large-scale citation analysis and that the other two gave similar results overall [35].”
Journal Quality in Mathematics Education (2017, background): “Recent studies (Meho & Yang, 2007; Norris & Oppenheim, 2007; Roales-Nieto & O’Neill, 2012) found substantial differences among the SCI and SSCI, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases in both journal inclusion and ability to locate references.”
International entrepreneurship: a bibliometric overview (2018, methodology): “However, Scopus has become a good alternative to the WoS because it has been designed for both literature search and citation analysis (Meho and Yang 2007; Vieira and Gomes 2009).”
Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories (2018, result): “Matter 296 17 20 8 9 3 22 21 50 72 54 84/212 = 40% 72/162 = 44% Yang & Meho (2007) Scientific production of two Library & Information Science (LIST) researchers 385 10 23 6 10 7 18 25 52 77 57 137/295 = 46% 124/218 = 57% Meho & Yang (2007) 1,457 articles published by 25 LIS researchers 5,285 48…”
Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. (2009, result): “Previous work has shown that the degree of overlap of citations appears to vary by field of study,(9) but to be no more than 58% between Web of Science and Scopus(16) and with no more than 31% of citations overlapping in all 3 databases.(9,16) Our sample of articles was acquired from select journals”
A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (2015, background): “Although other databases, such as Google Scholar, may provide wider coverage of certain types of publications (international, non-English journals, conference proceedings) [5], those publications were excluded from our review.”
Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis (2008, methodology): “Nisonger (2004) also summarises several other studies that found WoS citation data to be incomplete”
The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index (2010, methodology): “Meho and Yang (2007) have studied the citations found in 2006 for 1,457 scholarly works in the field of library science from the School of Library and Information Science at Indiana University-Bloomington and published in the period from 1970 to 2005.”
The Use of Bibliometrics to Measure Research Performance in Education Sciences (2012, background): “of Science contains no more than a small percentage of total publication activity (see Corby 2001; Dees 2008; Meho and Yang 2007; Moed 2005; Togia and Tsigilis 2006).”
Linking temperate demersal fish species to habitat: scales, patterns and future directions (2013, methodology): “(Belew 2005; Pauly and Stergiou 2005; Meho and Yang 2007; Harzing and Van der Wal 2008).”
Evaluating Journal Quality: Is the H-Index a Better Measure Than Impact Factors? (2011, neutral): “…coverage of Google Scholar and Thomson ISI from different perspectives (Bakkalbasi, Bauer, Glover, & Wang, 2006; Clarke, 2008; Jacobs, 2009; Falagas, Pitsouni, Malietzis, & Pappas, 2008; Kulkarni, Aziz, Shams, & Busse, 2009; Kousha & Thelwall, 2008; Meho & Yang, 2007; Mikki, 2010; Smith, 2008).”
Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature (2017, methodology): “…subsequent introduction of g-index as a refinement by taking citations into account (Egghe, 2006), a 2007 study that compares the impact of using the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar on citation-based ranking (Meho & Yang, 2007), a 2008 review entitled “What do citation counts measure?””