Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for Earth Sciences
ScientometricsPublished 9 June 2009
Susanne Mikki
Citations78
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score1.15
SNIP1.82
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
TL;DR
In order to measure the degree to which Google Scholar can compete with bibliographical databases, search results from this database is compared with Thomson’s ISI WoS (Institute for Scientific Information, Web of Science).
Abstract
In order to measure the degree to which Google Scholar can compete with bibliographical databases, search results from this database is compared with Thomson’s ISI WoS (Institute for Scientific Information, Web of Science). For earth science literature 85% of documents indexed by ISI WoS were recalled by Google Scholar. The rank of records displayed in Google Scholar and ISI WoS, is compared by means of Spearman’s footrule. For impact measures the h-index is investigated. Similarities in measures were significant for the two sources.
Keywords
Computer ScienceDecision Sciences
Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesAn index to quantify an individual's scientific research output
11,535 Citations2005J. E. Hirsch
The index hbar, defined as the number of papers of an individual that have citation count larger than or equal to the citation count of all coauthors of each paper, is proposed as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher that takes into account the effect of multiple authorship.
The European Physical Journal BHow popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution
1,508 Citations1998S. Redner
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and TechnologyImpact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar
968 Citations2007Lokman I. Meho, Kiduk Yang
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.
ScientometricsWhich h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar
719 Citations2007Judit Bar‐Ilan
This paper compares the h-indices of a list of highly-cited Israeli researchers based on citations counts retrieved from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar respectively with results obtained through Google Scholar.
LibriGoogle Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes
288 Citations2005Alireza Noruzi
This study compares the citation counts provided by Web of Science and Google Scholar for articles in the field of “Webometrics" and concludes that Google Scholar provides a free alternative or complement to other citation indexes.
portal Libraries and the AcademyThe Depth and Breadth of Google Scholar: An Empirical Study
156 Citations2006Chris Neuhaus, Ellen Neuhaus +2 more
Tests show Google Scholar’s current strengths to be coverage of science and medical databases, open access databases, and single publisher databases, while current weaknesses include lack of coverage of social science and humanities databases and an English language bias.
Online Information ReviewDeflated, inflated and phantom citation counts
155 Citations2006Péter Jacsó
The combination of the inflated citation count values dispensed by Google Scholar with the ignorance and shallowness of some GS enthusiasts can be a real mix for real scholars.
Information Processing & ManagementGoogle Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field
155 Citations2006William H. Walters
Of the eight databases evaluated, Google Scholar indexes the greatest number of core articles and provides the most uniform publisher and date coverage and a substantial proportion of the citations provided by Google Scholar are incomplete or presented without abstracts.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and TechnologyOn the robustness of the <i>h</i>‐index
154 Citations2007Jerome K. Vanclay
The h-index (Hirsch, 2005) is robust, remaining relatively unaffected by errors in the long tails of the citations-rank distribution, such as typographic errors that short-change frequently cited articles and create bogus additional records.
Journal of InformetricsSome measures for comparing citation databases
131 Citations2006Judit Bar‐Ilan, Mark Levene +1 more
A set of measures for computing the similarity between rankings induced by ordering the retrieved publications in decreasing order of the number of citations as reported by the specific tools are proposed.
Ethics in Science and Environmental PoliticsEquivalence of results from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI’s Citation Index and Google’s Scholar service
115 Citations2005Daniel Pauly, KI Stergiou
Citation counts were performed across a wide range of disciplines using both the Thomson ISI files and Google Scholar, and shown to lead to essentially the same results, in spite of their different methods for identifying citing sources.
arXiv (Cornell University)Scientific impact quantity and quality: Analysis of two sources of bibliographic data
58 Citations2005Richard K. Belew
This work analyzes 203 publications, collectively cited by more than 4000 other publications, and shows surprisingly good agreement between data citation counts provided by the two services, GoogleScholar and Thompson/ISI.