Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 21. Januar 2019)
1Gantman, E.R. ; Dabós, M.P.: Research output and impact of the fields of management, economics, and sociology in Spain and France : an analysis using Google Scholar and Scopus.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.8, S.1054-1066.
Abstract: Because of a greater coverage of documentary sources in many languages that is greater than that of traditional bibliographic databases, Google Scholar is an ideal tool for examining the social sciences in non-Anglophone countries. We have therefore used it to study the scholarly output and impact of three scientific disciplines, management, economics, and sociology, in Spain and France, comparing some of the results with those retrieved with Scopus. Our findings show that scientific articles are the predominant form of scholarly communication in Google Scholar for our selected fields and countries. In addition, our results indicate that in Google Scholar the vernacular languages of each country are more used than English in all cases, but economics in France. The opposite occurs in Scopus, except for the case of sociology articles in France We also show that books receive on average more citations than other published documents in Google Scholar. Finally, we demonstrate that publishing in English is associated with greater scholarly impact, except for the case of France in Google Scholar for articles in sociology and books in the three fields.
Inhalt: Vgl.: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asi.24020.
Wissenschaftsfach: Wirtschaftswissenschaften ; Soziologie
Objekt: Google Scholar ; Scopus
Land/Ort: F ; ES
2Abdelkareem, M.A.A.: In terms of publication index, what indicator is the best for researchers indexing, Google Scholar, Scopus, Clarivate or others?.
Abstract: I believe that Google Scholar is the most popular academic indexing way for researchers and citations. However, some other indexing institutions may be more professional than Google Scholar but not as popular as Google Scholar. Other indexing websites like Scopus and Clarivate are providing more statistical figures for scholars, institutions or even journals. On account of publication citations, always Google Scholar shows higher citations for a paper than other indexing websites since Google Scholar consider most of the publication platforms so he can easily count the citations. While other databases just consider the citations come from those journals that are already indexed in their database
Themenfeld: Retrievalalgorithmen ; Informetrie
Objekt: Google Scholar ; Scopus ; Clarivate
3Maflahi, N. ; Thelwall, M.: When are readership counts as useful as citation counts? : Scopus versus Mendeley for LIS journals.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.191-199.
Abstract: In theory, articles can attract readers on the social reference sharing site Mendeley before they can attract citations, so Mendeley altmetrics could provide early indications of article impact. This article investigates the influence of time on the number of Mendeley readers of an article through a theoretical discussion and an investigation into the relationship between counts of readers of, and citations to, 4 general library and information science (LIS) journals. For this discipline, it takes about 7 years for articles to attract as many Scopus citations as Mendeley readers, and after this the Spearman correlation between readers and citers is stable at about 0.6 for all years. This suggests that Mendeley readership counts may be useful impact indicators for both newer and older articles. The lack of dates for individual Mendeley article readers and an unknown bias toward more recent articles mean that readership data should be normalized individually by year, however, before making any comparisons between articles published in different years.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23369/abstract.
Wissenschaftsfach: Bibliothekswesen ; Informationswissenschaft
Objekt: Mendeley ; Scopus
4Leydesdorff, L. ; Moya-Anegón, F. de ; Nooy, W. de: Aggregated journal-journal citation relations in scopus and web of science matched and compared in terms of networks, maps, and interactive overlays.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.9, S.2194-2211.
Abstract: We compare the network of aggregated journal-journal citation relations provided by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2012 of the Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) with similar data based on Scopus 2012. First, global and overlay maps were developed for the 2 sets separately. Using fuzzy-string matching and ISSN numbers, we were able to match 10,524 journal names between the 2 sets: 96.4% of the 10,936 journals contained in JCR, or 51.2% of the 20,554 journals covered by Scopus. Network analysis was pursued on the set of journals shared between the 2 databases and the 2 sets of unique journals. Citations among the shared journals are more comprehensively covered in JCR than in Scopus, so the network in JCR is denser and more connected than in Scopus. The ranking of shared journals in terms of indegree (i.e., numbers of citing journals) or total citations is similar in both databases overall (Spearman rank correlation ??>?0.97), but some individual journals rank very differently. Journals that are unique to Scopus seem to be less important-they are citing shared journals rather than being cited by them-but the humanities are covered better in Scopus than in JCR.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23372/full.
Objekt: Scopus ; Web of science
5Casarin, H.C.S. ; Mattos, N.B. de: Child's information behavior in the domain of information science : an analysis through the Scopus database.
In: Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei. Würzburg : Ergon Verlag, 2016. S.469-476.
(Advances in knowledge organization; vol.15)
6Miguel, S. ; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z. ; Moya-Anegón, F. de: Open access and Scopus : a new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.6, S.1130-1145.
Abstract: The last few years have seen the emergence of several open access (OA) options in scholarly communication, which can be grouped broadly into two areas referred to as gold and green roads. Several recent studies have shown how large the extent of OA is, but there have been few studies showing the impact of OA in the visibility of journals covering all scientific fields and geographical regions. This research presents a series of informative analyses providing a broad overview of the degree of proliferation of OA journals in a data sample of about 17,000 active journals indexed in Scopus. This study shows a new approach to scientific visibility from a systematic combination of four databases: Scopus, the Directory of Open Access Journals, Rights Metadata for Open Archiving.
7García, J.A. ; Rodriguez-Sánchez, R. ; Fdez-Valdivia, J.: Ranking of the subject areas of Scopus.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.2013-2023.
Abstract: Here, we show a longitudinal analysis of the ranking of the subject areas of Elsevier's Scopus. To this aim, we present three summary measures based on the journal ranking scores for academic journals in each subject area. This longitudinal study allows us to analyze developmental trends over times in different subject areas with distinct citation and publication patterns. We evaluate the relative performance of each subject area by using the overall prestige for the most important journals with ranking score above a given threshold (e.g., in the first quartile) as well as the overall prestige gap for the less important journals with ranking score below a given threshold (e.g., below the top 10 journals). Thus, we propose that it should be possible to study different subject areas by means of appropriate summary measures of the journal ranking scores, which provide additional information beyond analyzing the inequality of the whole ranking-score distribution for academic journals in each subject area. It allows us to investigate whether subject areas with high levels of overall prestige for the first quartile journals also tended to achieve low levels of overall prestige gap for the journals below the top 10.
8Kousha, K. ; Thelwall, M. ; Rezaie, S.: Assessing the citation impact of books : the role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.11, S.2147-2164.
Abstract: Citation indictors are increasingly used in some subject areas to support peer review in the evaluation of researchers and departments. Nevertheless, traditional journal-based citation indexes may be inadequate for the citation impact assessment of book-based disciplines. This article examines whether online citations from Google Books and Google Scholar can provide alternative sources of citation evidence. To investigate this, we compared the citation counts to 1,000 books submitted to the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) from Google Books and Google Scholar with Scopus citations across seven book-based disciplines (archaeology; law; politics and international studies; philosophy; sociology; history; and communication, cultural, and media studies). Google Books and Google Scholar citations to books were 1.4 and 3.2 times more common than were Scopus citations, and their medians were more than twice and three times as high as were Scopus median citations, respectively. This large number of citations is evidence that in book-oriented disciplines in the social sciences, arts, and humanities, online book citations may be sufficiently numerous to support peer review for research evaluation, at least in the United Kingdom.
Objekt: Google Books ; Google Scholar ; Scopus
9Calculating the h-index : Web of Science, Scopus or Google Scholar?.
Abstract: Gegenüberstellung der Berechnung des h-Index in den drei Tools mit Beispiel Stephen Hawking (WoS: 59, Scopus: 19, Google Scholar: 76)
Objekt: h-index ; Web of Science ; Scopus ; Google Scholar
10Leydesdorff, L. ; Moya-Anegón, F.de ; Guerrero-Bote, V.P.: Journal maps on the basis of Scopus data : a comparison with the Journal Citation Reports of the ISI.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.2, S.352-369.
Abstract: Using the Scopus dataset (1996-2007) a grand matrix of aggregated journal-journal citations was constructed. This matrix can be compared in terms of the network structures with the matrix contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). Because the Scopus database contains a larger number of journals and covers the humanities, one would expect richer maps. However, the matrix is in this case sparser than in the case of the ISI data. This is because of (a) the larger number of journals covered by Scopus and (b) the historical record of citations older than 10 years contained in the ISI database. When the data is highly structured, as in the case of large journals, the maps are comparable, although one may have to vary a threshold (because of the differences in densities). In the case of interdisciplinary journals and journals in the social sciences and humanities, the new database does not add a lot to what is possible with the ISI databases.
Themenfeld: Informetrie ; Citation indexing
Objekt: Scopus ; Journal Citation Reports
11Leydesdorff, L. ; Persson, O.: Mapping the geography of science : distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.8, S.1622-1634.
Abstract: Using Google Earth, Google Maps, and/or network visualization programs such as Pajek, one can overlay the network of relations among addresses in scientific publications onto the geographic map. The authors discuss the pros and cons of various options, and provide software (freeware) for bridging existing gaps between the Science Citation Indices (Thomson Reuters) and Scopus (Elsevier), on the one hand, and these various visualization tools on the other. At the level of city names, the global map can be drawn reliably on the basis of the available address information. At the level of the names of organizations and institutes, there are problems of unification both in the ISI databases and with Scopus. Pajek enables a combination of visualization and statistical analysis, whereas the Google Maps and its derivatives provide superior tools on the Internet.
Themenfeld: Visualisierung ; Data Mining
Objekt: Google Earth ; Google Maps ; Science Citation Index ; Scopus ; Pajek
12Leydesdorff, L. ; Opthof, T.: Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2365-2369.
Abstract: Impact factors (and similar measures such as the Scimago Journal Rankings) suffer from two problems: (a) citation behavior varies among fields of science and, therefore, leads to systematic differences, and (b) there are no statistics to inform us whether differences are significant. The recently introduced "source normalized impact per paper" indicator of Scopus tries to remedy the first of these two problems, but a number of normalization decisions are involved, which makes it impossible to test for significance. Using fractional counting of citations-based on the assumption that impact is proportionate to the number of references in the citing documents-citations can be contextualized at the paper level and aggregated impacts of sets can be tested for their significance. It can be shown that the weighted impact of Annals of Mathematics (0.247) is not so much lower than that of Molecular Cell (0.386) despite a five-f old difference between their impact factors (2.793 and 13.156, respectively).
13Archambault, E. ; Campbell, D ; Gingras, Y. ; Larivière, V.: Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.7, S.1320-1326.
Abstract: For more than 40 years, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now part of Thomson Reuters) produced the only available bibliographic databases from which bibliometricians could compile large-scale bibliometric indicators. ISI's citation indexes, now regrouped under the Web of Science (WoS), were the major sources of bibliometric data until 2004, when Scopus was launched by the publisher Reed Elsevier. For those who perform bibliometric analyses and comparisons of countries or institutions, the existence of these two major databases raises the important question of the comparability and stability of statistics obtained from different data sources. This paper uses macrolevel bibliometric indicators to compare results obtained from the WoS and Scopus. It shows that the correlations between the measures obtained with both databases for the number of papers and the number of citations received by countries, as well as for their ranks, are extremely high. There is also a very high correlation when countries' papers are broken down by field. The paper thus provides evidence that indicators of scientific production and citations at the country level are stable and largely independent of the database.
Objekt: Web of Science ; Scopus
14Meho, L.I. ; Sugimoto, C.R.: Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies : a tale of two citation databases - Scopus and Web of Science.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.12, S.2499-2508.
Abstract: This study uses citations, from 1996 to 2007, to the work of 80 randomly selected full-time, information studies (IS) faculty members from North America to examine differences between Scopus and Web of Science in assessing the scholarly impact of the field focusing on the most frequently citing journals, conference proceedings, research domains and institutions, as well as all citing countries. Results show that when assessment is limited to smaller citing entities (e.g., journals, conference proceedings, institutions), the two databases produce considerably different results, whereas when assessment is limited to larger citing entities (e.g., research domains, countries), the two databases produce very similar pictures of scholarly impact. In the former case, the use of Scopus (for journals and institutions) and both Scopus and Web of Science (for conference proceedings) is necessary to more accurately assess or visualize the scholarly impact of IS, whereas in the latter case, assessing or visualizing the scholarly impact of IS is independent of the database used.
Objekt: Scopus ; Web of Science
15Neuhaus, C. ; Daniel, H.-D.: Data sources for performing citation analysis : an overview.
In: Journal of documentation. 64(2008) no.2, S.193-210.
Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of new citation-enhanced databases and to identify issues to be considered when they are used as a data source for performing citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reports the limitations of Thomson Scientific's citation indexes and reviews the characteristics of the citation-enhanced databases Chemical Abstracts, Google Scholar and Scopus. Findings - The study suggests that citation-enhanced databases need to be examined carefully, with regard to both their potentialities and their limitations for citation analysis. Originality/value - The paper presents a valuable overview of new citation-enhanced databases in the context of research evaluation.
Themenfeld: Informetrie ; Citation indexing
Objekt: Science citation index ; Social sciences citation index ; Arts and humanities citation index ; Chemical Abstracts ; Google Scholar ; Scopus
16Meho, L.I. ; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1711-1726.
Abstract: This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
Themenfeld: Informationsmittel ; Informetrie
Objekt: Scopus ; Web of Science ; h-index
17Levitt, J.M. ; Thelwall, M.: Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? : a macrolevel study.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.12, S.1973-1984.
Abstract: Interdisciplinary collaboration is a major goal in research policy. This study uses citation analysis to examine diverse subjects in the Web of Science and Scopus to ascertain whether, in general, research published in journals classified in more than one subject is more highly cited than research published in journals classified in a single subject. For each subject, the study divides the journals into two disjoint sets called Multi and Mono. Multi consists of all journals in the subject and at least one other subject whereas Mono consists of all journals in the subject and in no other subject. The main findings are: (a) For social science subject categories in both the Web of Science and Scopus, the average citation levels of articles in Mono and Multi are very similar; and (b) for Scopus subject categories within life sciences, health sciences, and physical sciences, the average citation level of Mono articles is roughly twice that of Multi articles. Hence, one cannot assume that in general, multidisciplinary research will be more highly cited, and the converse is probably true for many areas of science. A policy implication is that, at least in the sciences, multidisciplinary researchers should not be evaluated by citations on the same basis as monodisciplinary researchers.
Objekt: Web of Science ; Scopus
18Meho, L.I. ; Yang, K.: Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty : Web of science versus scopus and google scholar.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.13, S.2105-2125.
Abstract: The Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI, now Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, PA) 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. The 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 (LIS) faculty members as a case study, the authors examine 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. The WoS data took about 100 hours of collecting and processing time, Scopus consumed 200 hours, and GS a grueling 3,000 hours.
Wissenschaftsfach: Bibliothekswesen ; Informationswissenschaft
Objekt: Web of Science ; Scopus ; Google Scholar
19Schneider, K. ; Eller, G.A.: "Speed kills?" : Versuch einer vergleichenden Bewertung der Aktualität der Datenbanken Scopus (Elsevier), ISI Web of Science (Thomson Scientifc) und Scifinder (CAS) aus pharmazeutisch-chemischer Sicht.
In: Online Mitteilungen. 2007, Nr.90, S.3-8 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 60(2007) H.2].
Abstract: Die Präsentation der bibliographischen Datenbank Scopus durch Elsevier im Jahre 2004 in direktem Mitbewerb zum bisher unangefochtenen Marktführer Web of Science (WoS) von Thomson Scientific hat bereits nach kurzer Zeit bei Bibliothekar(inn)en und Endnutzer(inne)n für rege Diskussionen gesorgt; für immer mehr wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken stellte sich bald die Frage eines möglichen Ersatzes des WoS durch Scopus, da aus budgetären Gründen ein paralleler Ankauf meist nicht möglich ist. Viele Diskussionsveranstaltungen, (Firmen-)Präsentationen, Expert(inn)entreffen und Übersichtsarbeiten widmen sich inzwischen den jeweiligen fachlichen, inhaltlichen, geografischen oder bibliometrischen Vor- und Nachteilen dieser Datenbanken (Siehe Kapitelliteratur). Umso erstaunlicher erscheint aber, dass die Datenaktualität bisher nur relativ wenig Beachtung fand, ist doch gerade in den Lebenswissenschaften ("Life Sciences") dieses Kriterium von höchster Wichtigkeit. Hier präsentieren wir daher das Ergebnis einer kleinen Untersuchung, in der wir an 45 für die Pharmazie und Chemie relevanten Fachzeitschriften verglichen, welches Heft das jeweils aktuellste in der Datenbank indexierte ist. Wir ergänzten dazu die beiden fachübergreifenden Datenbanken Scopus und WoS um die fachspezifische Datenbank SciFinder (Scholar) der Chemical Abstract Services (CAS), die nicht nur eine der wichtigsten Informationsquellen für alle Fragen der Chemie (Strukturen, Reaktionen, Literatur, etc.) darstellt, sondern auch fürangrenzende Disziplinen wie Pharmazie, Biologie, Materialwissenschaften und Physik von höchstem Interesse ist. Dies belegen die 27 Millionen derzeit indexierten Patente und Zeitschriftenartikel aus den unterschiedlichsten naturwissenschaftlichen Bereichen. ; Bei der Auswahl der Zeitschriften strebten wir ein möglichst breites, aber dennoch repräsentatives Portfolio in Bezug auf Verlag, Impaktfaktor, Artikelanzahl pro Heft, etc. an: von "Angewandte Chemie International Edition" bis "Die Pharmazie", von "Planta Medica" bis "European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry", von ,,Tetrahedron Letters" bis zu "British Journal of Pharmacology". Wichtige deutschsprachige Zeitschriften (z. B. "Scientia Pharmaceutica", "Deutsche Apothekerzeitung") wurden zwar ebenfalls untersucht, konnten jedoch wegen der fehlenden Indexierung im WoS nicht ausgewertet werden. Am Stichtag 12. Februar 2007 wurde für die in allen 3 Datenbanken enthaltenen 45 Zeitschriften nach dem jeweils neuesten Heft gesucht und zusätzlich das an diesem Tag aktuell veröffentlichte Heft ermittelt.
Wissenschaftsfach: Chemie ; Pharmazie
Objekt: Scopus ; Web of Science ; Scifinder
20Gorraiz, J.: "Web of Science" versus "Scopus" oder das aktuelle Dilemma der Bibliotheken.
In: Online Mitteilungen. 2006, Nr.85, S.25-30 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 59(2006) H.1].
Abstract: Bei den nachfolgenden Ausführungen handelt es sich um eine Zusammenstellung von Kommentaren, Vorträgen und Rückmeldungen von Kollegen bzw. Benutzern der Bibliothek sowie meine eigenen Erfahrungen als Vortragender im Universitätslehrgang "Master of Science", in dessen Rahmen ich das Fach "Bibliometrie" unterrichte. Schwerpunkt dieses Beitrages ist eine Zusammenfassung der Diskussion "Web of Science versus Scopus", die den aktuellen Stand der Kontroverse (vor allem an der Universität Wien im naturwissenschaftlichen Sektor) widerspiegelt. Hier ist zu bemerken, dass diese Problematik auch fachspezifisch ist und deswegen an jeder Universität bzw. in jedem Fachgebiet anders zu betrachten ist. Startpunkt meiner Betrachtung ist die allgemein akzeptierte Notwendigkeit des "Journal of Citation Reports (JCR)". Nur in diesem bibliometrischen Verzeichnis sind derzeit die "Impact Factors" zu finden, die als Grundlage jeder akademischen Evaluation dienen. Deswegen ist JCR heutzutage an jeder Universität mit naturwissenschaftlichen Fächern unentbehrlich und das aktuelle Dilemma der Bibliothekare lautet nicht wirklich "Web of Science versus Scopus", sondern genaugesagt "Fallbeispiel A: Web of Science &JCR" oder "Fallbeispiel B: Scopus &JCR".
Themenfeld: Citation indexing
Objekt: Web of Science ; Scopus