100 likes | 249 Views
Google Scholar and Google Web/URL Citation: some evidence of scholarly patterns on the Web. Aims. Correlation between ISI citation counts and either Google Scholar or Google Web/URL citation counts for articles in OA journals in eight disciplines
E N D
Google Scholar and Google Web/URL Citation: some evidence of scholarly patterns on the Web Aims • Correlation between ISI citation counts and either Google Scholar or Google Web/URL citation counts for articles in OA journals in eight disciplines • Overlap between ISI and Google Scholar citations • Characteristics of non-overlapping Google Citations with ISI • Classification of web sources targeting articles
Data collection Well known and used formal scholarly citations. High impact journals Also formal web-extracted citations. But not much information about its quality Formal, informal and navigational “citations”.
Results 1-Conventional citations correlate with Web-extracted citations (quantitative evidence) • ISI citations correlate with Google Scholar citation (journal/article level) • Google Scholar citations were more numerous than ISI citations in computer science and the four social science disciplines • ISI citations correlate with Google Web/URL citations(but weaker than above) • “Article title” OR URL -site: journal URL address • Higher correlations between ISI and Google unique Web/URL citations than Google total Web/URL citations (counting one site per site) Sample 1650 articles in 108 OA journals in eight disciplines: biology, chemistry, physics, computing, sociology, economics, psychology, education
Result 2- 57% Sharing citations between ISI and GS (validating previous results) • 57% (2,387) of ISI citations were duplicated (overlapped) in Google Scholar results OR • 43% Google Scholar citations were unique (covered in another study) • This overlap percentage was relatively higher in biology (66%), physics (62%) and computing (57%), and considerably lower in chemistry (33%). 882 articles in 39 OA journals in 4 disciplines= biology, chemistry, physics, computing.
Result 3- Double growth in GS citations than ISI (validating GS) • The percentage increase for ISI citations was about 12% and Google Scholar 22% (October 2005 to January 2006) in four science disciplines. • This increase was considerably higher in computing (13% vs. 26%), biology, and physics; and it was significantly lower for chemistry (31% Vs. 18%) 882 articles in 39 OA journals in 4 disciplines= biology, chemistry, physics, computing.
Result 4- Type of GS unique citations differ in disciplines E-prints (48%) Conference (43%) Journal (88%) Journal (68%)
Result 5- Accessibility of GS unique citations • 70% of GS were full-text sources • Google Scholar has a wider coverage of Open Access (OA) web documents and non-journal documents more useful for citation tracking across full text documents
Result 6- Classification of reasonsfor creating Web Citations in Science Sample of 1577 Google unique Web/URL citations in 64 open access journals from biology, physics, chemistry, and computing
Reasons for Creating Google Unique Web/URL Citations in the four science disciplines
Conclusion • We can use Web based citation patterns for impact assessment of journals especially when ISI citations are not accessible and in social science disciplines with less ISI journal coverage. • Disciplinary differences should be considered in the results.