1 / 20

Evaluating Google Scholar for Bibliometrics: Pros, Cons, and Comparison to Traditional Databases

Explore the use of Google Scholar for bibliometrics, comparing its pros and cons to traditional databases like Web of Science. Discover tools to calculate metrics like h-index and how researchers across various disciplines utilize Google Scholar. Gain insights from subject-specific studies highlighting discrepancies and benefits. Understand the significance and limitations of using Google Scholar in bibliometric analysis.

mballou
Download Presentation

Evaluating Google Scholar for Bibliometrics: Pros, Cons, and Comparison to Traditional Databases

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Google Scholar Can it really be used for bibliometrics? Isobel Stark & Michael WhittonJune 2011

  2. Google Scholar • Historical background? • Google Scholar released (in beta) in 2004 • Not the first freely available citation database (CiteSeer, Scirus, etc) • Not subject specific • Is it a viable alternative to ‘traditional’ citation databases such as Web of Science?

  3. Pros of Google Scholar • Easy to access and free • Indexes a wide range of articles • Especially Law, Humanities, Social Sciences • Can find a wider range of metrics • Metrics are generally a higher number

  4. Cons of Google Scholar • Questionable data • Lack of de-duplication • Gaps • Relies on algorithms • Not designed for popular bibliometric measures • Requires add-ons to calculate h-index etc.

  5. Recommended services (h-index on GS) • Quadsearch (Any browser) • Scholar H-index Calculator (Mozilla Firefox) • Scholarometer (Mozilla Firefox/Google Chrome) • Publish or Perish (Separate Application)

  6. How our researchers use it • CVs and bids for funding • Preferred by Medicine over InCites • Factsheet for “Finding your h-index in Google Scholar” is very popular • 6,764 visits in the last year • To compare WoS h-Index guide is 1,559 and Impact Factors 1,045

  7. From the literature … • Bar-Illan (2008) – Israeli highly cited researchers • Significant differences from WoS and Scopus • Metrics can be higher (computer science), similar or lower (physics) • Jasco (2008) • Problems of missing & wrong authors • Prolific authors F Password & M Profile • Specific problems often resolved

  8. Subject specific studies • Franceshet (2009) – Computer Science • Google Scholar metrics are much higher • Significant correlation (but varies by type of metric) • Importance of proceedings • Levine-Clark (2009) – Social Sciences • Significant value of using Google Scholar in addition to WoS • Significant value in journals not indexed by WoS & coverage of books

  9. Subject specific studies … • Lee (2009) – Neurosurgery • Significant correlation between Google Scholar and Scopus • Mingers (2010) – Business & Management • Lack of reliability and transparency of Google Scholar, but potential for a more comprehensive and less subject dependant analysis.

  10. The h-index: WoS vs Google Scholar • Prof. Nigel Shadbolt (Computer Science) • WoS: 16 • Google Scholar: 23 • Dr Simon Coles (Chemistry) • WoS: 36 • Google Scholar 22

  11. The h-index: WoS vs Google Scholar … • Prof. Sally Brailsford (Management) • WoS: 9 • Google Scholar: 13 • Prof. Christian Ottensmeier (Medicine) • WoS: 19 • Google Scholar: 19

  12. The h-index: WoS vs Google Scholar … • Prof. Jane Falkingham(Social Sciences) • WoS: 7 • Google Scholar: 23 • Dr Joanna Sofaer (Archaeology) • WoS: 2 • Google Scholar: 9

  13. Supporting bibliometrics • Library research guides • www.soton.ac.uk/library/research/bibliometrics • Deskside training • 1-2-1 training for staff & research postgraduates • Planned session for research postgraduates • delivered through the Graduate School training programme

  14. Conclusions • Some variation by subject • Significant issues with quality of the data • Can be useful to use in addition to Web of Science and/or Scopus

  15. References • BAR-ILAN, J. 2008. Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74, 257-271. • FRANCESCHET, M. 2009. A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 83, 243-258. • JACSO, P. 2008. The pros and cons of computing the h-index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32, 437-452.

  16. References … • LEVINE-CLARK, M. & GIL, E. 2009. A comparative analysis of social sciences citation tools. Online Information Review, 33, 986-996. • LEE, J., KRAUS, K. L. & COULDWELL, W. T. 2009. Use of the h index in neurosurgery. Journal of Neurosurgery, 111, 387-392. • MINGERS, J. & LIPITAKIS, E. A. E. C. G. 2010. Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85, 613-625.

More Related