A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university

568 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, methodology): “Different approaches to citing-side normalization are discussed by Zitt and Small (2008), Zitt (2010), Gómez-Sancho and Mancebón-Torrubia (2009), Moed (2010a), Leydesdorff and Opthof (2010), Leydesdorff and Bornmann (2011a), Leydesdorff et al.”
How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research (2022, background): “The validity of a study will depend on the proper selection of a database since it must adequately cover the area under investigation [19] .”
Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison (2015, background): “Other studies compared Scopus and the Web of Science for individual universities (Torres-Salinas et al. 2009; Vieira and Gomes 2009) and Scopus and Google Scholar for the Social Sciences in four Spanish universities (Etxebarria and Gomez-Uranga 2010).”
Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric Review of Its Managerial Intellectual Structure and Potential Evolution in the Service Industries (2019, background): “The database is considered, alongside Web of Science, the most prominent source of academic works in the social sciences domain (Vieira and Gomes, 2009).”
Virtual and remote labs in education: A bibliometric analysis (2016, methodology): “, the paid subscription databases ISIWoS and Scopus are currently the most reliable [56, 57].”