A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Abdulhayoglu, M. A., & Thijs, B. (2018). Use of locality sensitive hashing (LSH) algorithm to match Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics,116(2), 1229–1245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2569-6.
Adriaanse, L. S., & Rensleigh, C. (2013). Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison. The Electronic Library,31(6), 727–744. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2011-0174.
Ellegaard, O. (2018). The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects. Scientometrics,116(1), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2765-z.
Guilera, G., Barrios, M., & Gómez-Benito, J. (2013). Meta-analysis in psychology: A bibliometric study. Scientometrics,94(3), 943–954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0761-2.
Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S., & Stewart, G. (2018). Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature,555(7695), 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25753.
Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics,106(2), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
Hu, Z., Tian, W., Xu, S., Zhang, C., & Wang, X. (2018). Four pitfalls in normalizing citation indicators: An investigation of ESI’s selection of highly cited papers. Journal of Informetrics,12(4), 1133–1145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.006.
Jacso, P. (2018). The scientometric portrait of Eugene Garfield through the free ResearcherID service from the Web of Science Core Collection of 67 million master records and 13 billion references. Scientometrics,114(2), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2624-3.
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019). The research trends and contributions of System’s publications over the past four decades (1973–2017): A bibliometric analysis. System,80, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.10.003.
Leydesdorff, L., Carley, S., & Rafols, I. (2013). Global maps of science based on the new Web-of-Science categories. Scientometrics,94(2), 589–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0784-8.
Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics,115(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5.
Liu, W. (2019). The data source of this study is Web of Science Core Collection? Not enough. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1815–1824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03238-1.
Liu, W., Ding, Y., & Gu, M. (2017). Book reviews in academic journals: Patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics,110(1), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2172-2.
Liu, W., Hu, G., & Tang, L. (2018). Missing author address information in Web of Science—An explorative study. Journal of Informetrics,12(3), 985–997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.07.008.
Liu, W., Hu, G., Tang, L., & Wang, Y. (2015a). China’s global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978–2013). Journal of Informetrics,9(3), 555–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.05.007.
Liu, W., Tang, L., Gu, M., & Hu, G. (2015b). Feature report on China: A bibliometric analysis of China-related articles. Scientometrics,102(1), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1371-y.
Liu, W., Tang, L., & Hu, G. (2020). Funding information in Web of Science: An updated overview. Scientometrics, in press.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03362-3.
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics,12(4), 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002.
Meho, L. I., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2009). Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies: A tale of two citation databases—Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,60(12), 2499–2508. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21165.
Moed, H. F., Markusova, V., & Akoev, M. (2018). Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. Scientometrics,116(2), 1153–1180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2769-8.
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.
Quan, W., Chen, B., & Shu, F. (2017). Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999–2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management,69(5), 486–502. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0014.
Rousseau, R., Egghe, L., & Guns, R. (2018). Becoming metric-wise: A bibliometric guide for researchers. Cambridge, MA: Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-01828-1.
Tang, L., & Shapira, P. (2011). China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: Patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics,88(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0376-z.
Tang, L., Shapira, P., & Youtie, J. (2015). Is there a clubbing effect underlying Chinese research citation increases? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(9), 1923–1932. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23302.
Wang, Q., & Waltman, L. (2016). Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics,10(2), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.003.
Yu, D., Xu, Z., & Wang, W. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of fuzzy theory research in China: A 30-year perspective. Knowledge-Based Systems,141, 188–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.11.018.
Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,67(5), 1257–1265. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23487.
Zhu, J., Hu, G., & Liu, W. (2019a). DOI errors and possible solutions for Web of Science. Scientometrics,118(2), 709–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2980-7.