Impact of Data Sources on Citation Counts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar

Meho, Lokman I.; Yang, Kiduk

November 20, 2018: Most content in the UA Campus Repository is not accessible using the search/browse functions due to a performance bug; we are actively working to resolve this issue. If you are looking for content you know is in the repository, but cannot get to it, please email us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions and we'll make sure to get the content to you.

Name:

meho-yang-03.pdf

Size:

609.7Kb

Format:

PDF

Download

Author

Meho, Lokman I.
Yang, Kiduk

Issue Date

2007-01

Submitted date

2007-01-27

Keywords

Databases
Citation Analysis
Bibliometrics
Information Retrieval
Web Metrics
Internet
Database Searching Instructions
Informetrics

Local subject classification

Web of Science
Scopus
Google Scholar
Citation analysis
Bibliometrics
Research evaluation
Informetrics
Webometrics
Scientometrics
Databases
Database evaluation

Metadata

Show full item record

Citation

Impact of Data Sources on Citation Counts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar 2007-01,

URI

http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105208

Abstract

The Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI) citation databases have been used for decades as a starting point and often as the only tools for locating citations and/or conducting citation analyses. ISI databases (or Web of Science [WoS]), however, may no longer be sufficient because new databases and tools that allow citation searching are now available. Using citations to the work of 25 library and information science faculty members as a case study, this paper examines the effects of using Scopus and Google Scholar (GS) on the citation counts and rankings of scholars as measured by WoS. Overall, more than 10,000 citing and purportedly citing documents were examined. Results show that Scopus significantly alters the relative ranking of those scholars that appear in the middle of the rankings and that GS stands out in its coverage of conference proceedings as well as international, non-English language journals. The use of Scopus and GS, in addition to WoS, helps reveal a more accurate and comprehensive picture of the scholarly impact of authors. WoS data took about 100 hours of collecting and processing time, Scopus consumed 200 hours, and GS a grueling 3,000 hours.