-
Meho, L.I.; Yang, K.: Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty : Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007)
0.01
0.012603517 = product of:
0.07247022 = sum of:
0.012935456 = product of:
0.025870912 = sum of:
0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025870912 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026419718 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025870912 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
- 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.
- Field
- Bibliothekswesen
Informationswissenschaft
-
Meho, L.I.; Spurgin, K.M.: Ranking the research productivity of library and information science faculty and schools : an evaluation of data sources and research methods (2005)
0.01
0.0068062004 = product of:
0.05218087 = sum of:
0.010348365 = product of:
0.02069673 = sum of:
0.02069673 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 4343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02069673 = score(doc=4343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19700313 = fieldWeight in 4343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4343)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.021135775 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021135775 = score(doc=4343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.1990817 = fieldWeight in 4343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4343)
0.02069673 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 4343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02069673 = score(doc=4343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19700313 = fieldWeight in 4343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4343)
0.13043478 = coord(3/23)
- Field
- Bibliothekswesen
Informationswissenschaft
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- 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.
