257,477 research outputs found
Does it Matter Which Citation Tool is Used to Compare the h-index of a Group of Highly Cited Researchers?
h-index retrieved by citation indexes (Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science) is used to measure the scientific performance and the research impact studies based on the number of publications and citations of a scientist. It also is easily available and may be used for performance measures of scientists, and for recruitment decisions. The aim of this study is to investigate the difference between the outputs and results from these three citation databases namely Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science based upon the h-index of a group of highly cited researchers (Nobel Prize winner scientist). The purposive sampling method was adopted to collect the required data. The results showed that there is a significant difference in the h-index between three citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science; the Google scholar h-index was more than the h-index in two other databases. It was also concluded that there is a significant positive relationship between h-indices based on Google scholar and Scopus. The citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science may be useful for evaluating h-index of scientists but they have some limitations as well
Does it Matter Which Citation Tool is Used to Compare the h-index of a Group of Highly Cited Researchers?
h-index retrieved by citation indexes (Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science) is used to measure the scientific performance and the research impact studies based on the number of publications and citations of a scientist. It also is easily available and may be used for performance measures of scientists, and for recruitment decisions. The aim of this study is to investigate the difference between the outputs and results from these three citation databases namely Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science based upon the h-index of a group of highly cited researchers (Nobel Prize winner scientist). The purposive sampling method was adopted to collect the required data. The results showed that there is a significant difference in the h-index between three citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science; the Google scholar h-index was more than the h-index in two other databases. It was also concluded that there is a significant positive relationship between h-indices based on Google scholar and Scopus. The citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science may be useful for evaluating h-index of scientists but they have some limitations as well.Cite as:
Farhadi, H., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Aghaei Chadegani, A., Farhadi, M., Fooladi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). Does it Matter Which Citation Tool is Used to Compare the h-index of a Group of Highly Cited Researchers? Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(4), 198-202. doi: arXiv:1306.072
Large-Scale Analysis of the Accuracy of the Journal Classification Systems of Web of Science and Scopus
Journal classification systems play an important role in bibliometric
analyses. The two most important bibliographic databases, Web of Science and
Scopus, each provide a journal classification system. However, no study has
systematically investigated the accuracy of these classification systems. To
examine and compare the accuracy of journal classification systems, we define
two criteria on the basis of direct citation relations between journals and
categories. We use Criterion I to select journals that have weak connections
with their assigned categories, and we use Criterion II to identify journals
that are not assigned to categories with which they have strong connections. If
a journal satisfies either of the two criteria, we conclude that its assignment
to categories may be questionable. Accordingly, we identify all journals with
questionable classifications in Web of Science and Scopus. Furthermore, we
perform a more in-depth analysis for the field of Library and Information
Science to assess whether our proposed criteria are appropriate and whether
they yield meaningful results. It turns out that according to our
citation-based criteria Web of Science performs significantly better than
Scopus in terms of the accuracy of its journal classification system
A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases
Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics.Cite as:
Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18-26. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n5p1
Global Research Report – South and East Asia
Global Research Report – South and East Asia by Jonathan Adams, David Pendlebury, Gordon Rogers & Martin Szomszor. Published by Institute for Scientific Information, Web of Science Group
Revisiting h measured on UK LIS and IR academics
A brief communication appearing in this journal ranked UK LIS and (some) IR academics by their h-index
using data derived from Web of Science. In this brief communication, the same academics were re-ranked,
using other popular citation databases. It was found that for academics who publish more in computer
science forums, their h was significantly different due to highly cited papers missed by Web of Science;
consequently their rank changed substantially. The study was widened to a broader set of UK LIS and IR
academics where results showed similar statistically significant differences. A variant of h, hmx, was
introduced that allowed a ranking of the academics using all citation databases together
Electronic Resources and Heterodox Economists
The idea of measuring scientific relevance by counting citations is gaining ever-growing consensus among economists, and thanks to the electronic bibliographic resources now available the procedure has become relatively simple and fast. However, when it comes to putting the idea into practice many challenging problems emerge. This paper uses five of the principal bibliographic electronic resources (EconLit, JSTOR, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar) to test the practical applicability of this method for measuring relevance to the particular case of heterodox economics.heterodox economists; EconLit; JSTOR; Web of Science; Scopus; Google Scholar
Measuring research impact: A first approximation of the achievements of the iSchools in ISI's information and library science category ??? An exploratory study
In this paper, we analyze those publications of the home institutes of the iSchools that are indexed by Thomson Reuters (ISI) Web of Science in the information science and library science category, and were published between 2000 and 2009
Journal portfolio analysis for countries, cities, and organizations: maps and comparisons
Using Web of Science data, portfolio analysis in terms of journal coverage can be projected onto a base map for units of analysis such as countries, cities, universities, and firms. The units of analysis under study can be compared statistically across the 10,000+ journals. The interdisciplinarity of the portfolios is measured using Rao-Stirling diversity or Zhang et al.'s improved measure 2D3. At the country level we find regional differentiation (e.g., Latin American or Asian countries), but also a major divide between advanced and less-developed countries. Israel and Israeli cities outperform other nations and cities in terms of diversity. Universities appear to be specifically related to firms when a number of these units are exploratively compared. The instrument is relatively simple and straightforward, and one can generalize the application to any document set retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS). Further instruction is provided online at http://www.leydesdorff.net/portfolio
La vivienda, un problema de acceso al suelo
Indexación: Web of Science; Scielo.Fifty years of continuous development of land squatting seem to indicate the need for new instruments to face the housing deficit. Segregation and urban sprawl are evidences of the importance of land management policies for low-income housing.http://ref.scielo.org/hjkjb
- …