scholarly journals Ranking by Relevance and Citation Counts, a Comparative Study: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, WoS and Scopus

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rovira ◽  
Codina ◽  
Guerrero-Solé ◽  
Lopezosa
Keyword(s):  
Search Engine ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Growth Potential ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Unexpected Finding ◽  
Ranking Algorithms ◽  
Microsoft Academic ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
The Impact

Search engine optimization (SEO) constitutes the set of methods designed to increase the visibility of, and the number of visits to, a web page by means of its ranking on the search engine results pages. Recently, SEO has also been applied to academic databases and search engines, in a trend that is in constant growth. This new approach, known as academic SEO (ASEO), has generated a field of study with considerable future growth potential due to the impact of open science. The study reported here forms part of this new field of analysis. The ranking of results is a key aspect in any information system since it determines the way in which these results are presented to the user. The aim of this study is to analyze and compare the relevance ranking algorithms employed by various academic platforms to identify the importance of citations received in their algorithms. Specifically, we analyze two search engines and two bibliographic databases: Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic, on the one hand, and Web of Science and Scopus, on the other. A reverse engineering methodology is employed based on the statistical analysis of Spearman’s correlation coefficients. The results indicate that the ranking algorithms used by Google Scholar and Microsoft are the two that are most heavily influenced by citations received. Indeed, citation counts are clearly the main SEO factor in these academic search engines. An unexpected finding is that, at certain points in time, Web of Science (WoS) used citations received as a key ranking factor, despite the fact that WoS support documents claim this factor does not intervene.

scholarly journals A citation analysis of Serbian Dental Journal using Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 201-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelena Jacimovic ◽  
Ruzica Petrovic ◽  
Slavoljub Zivkovic
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Thomson Scientific ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Comprehensive Picture ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Citation Databases

Introduction. For a long time, The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, US) citation databases, available online through the Web of Science (WoS), had an unique position among bibliographic databases. The emergence of new citation databases, such as Scopus and Google Scholar (GS), call in question the dominance of WoS and the accuracy of bibliometric and citation studies exclusively based on WoS data. The aim of this study was to determine whether there were significant differences in the received citation counts for Serbian Dental Journal (SDJ) found in WoS and Scopus databases, or whether GS results differed significantly from those obtained by WoS and Scopus, and whether GS could be an adequate qualitative alternative for commercial databases in the impact assessment of this journal. Material and Methods. The data regarding SDJ citation was collected in September 2010 by searching WoS, Scopus and GS databases. For further analysis, all relevant data of both, cited and citing articles, were imported into Microsoft Access? database. Results. One hundred and fifty-eight cited papers from SDJ and 249 received citations were found in the three analyzed databases. 74% of cited articles were found in GS, 46% in Scopus and 44% in WoS. The greatest number of citations (189) was derived from GS, while only 15% of the citations, were found in all three databases. There was a significant difference in the percentage of unique citations found in the databases. 58% originated from GS, while Scopus and WoS gave 6% and 4% unique citations, respectively. The highest percentage of databases overlap was found between WoS and Scopus (70%), while the overlap between Scopus and GS was 18% only. In case of WoS and GS the overlap was 17%. Most of the SDJ citations came from original scientific articles. Conclusion. WoS, Scopus and GS produce quantitatively and qualitatively different citation counts for SDJ articles. None of the examined databases can provide a comprehensive picture and it is necessary to take into account all three available sources.

The Impact of Search Engines on Virus Propagation

2021 ◽  
pp. 2150230
Author(s):  
Cai Fu ◽  
Zhaokang Ke ◽  
Yunhe Zhang ◽  
Xiwu Chen ◽  
Liqing Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Search Engine ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Immune Mechanism ◽  
Virus Propagation ◽  
Immunization Strategy ◽  
Immune Mechanisms ◽  
Social Network Data ◽  
Information Engineering ◽  
The Impact

With the popularization of computers and the development of information engineering, the emergence of search engines makes it possible to get the information needed from big data quickly and efficiently. However, in recent years, a multiplicity of new viruses have been propagated by search engines. Many researchers choose to cut off the source of virus propagation, ignoring the virus immunization strategy based on the search engine. In this paper, we analyze the impact of search engines on virus propagation. First, considering the immune effect and cost, two kinds of immune mechanisms based on the search engine that have greater practicability are defined. Second, immune mechanisms based on the search engine are theoretically analyzed by the iteration method and the dynamic method. The results show that this immunization strategy can slow down or eliminate the propagation of a virus to a certain extent. Third, three real social network data sets are used to simulate and analyze the immune mechanism. We find that when the proportion of nodes being infected and the proportion of infected nodes being identified by the search engine satisfy a certain relationship, our immune mechanism can inhibit the spread of viruses, which confirms our theoretical analysis results.

An evaluation of Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar citations in operations management

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 1039-1053 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Chapman ◽  
Alexander E. Ellinger
Keyword(s):  
Operations Management ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
English Language Journal ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Number Of Citations

Purpose Ongoing deliberation about how research productivity should be measured is exacerbated by extensive disparity between the number of citations for scholarly works reported by commercial academic search engines and Google Scholar (GS), the premier web crawling service for discovering research citations. Disparities identified in citation comparison studies have also led to disagreement about the value of the higher number of citations for social sciences and business scholarly articles consistently reported by GS. The purpose of this paper is to extend previous database citation comparison studies by manually analyzing a sample of unique GS citations to a leading operations management journal (i.e. citations found only in GS and not the commercial search engines) to reveal just where these additional citations are coming from. Design/methodology/approach In addition to comparing citation counts for the three databases, unique GS citation data for the sample of journal articles was manually captured and reviewed. The authors’ approach provides a much more in-depth examination of the provenance of GS citations than is found in previous studies. Findings The findings suggest that concerns about the value of unique GS citations may not be warranted since the document types for the unique GS citing documents identified in the analysis are dominated by familiar scholarly formats. Predominantly authentic and validated journal publications, dissertations, conference papers, and book and book chapters accounted for the large majority of the unique GS citations analyzed. Practical implications The study lends further credence to contentions that the use of citations reported in GS is appropriate for evaluating research impact in disciplines where other formats beyond the English-language journal article are valued. Originality/value Developing a more informed understanding of the provenance of unique GS citations in the authors’ field is important because many scholars not only aspire to publish in elite journals with high impact factors based on citation counts provided by commercial databases to demonstrate quality, but also report the larger number of citations for their publications that are reported by GS to demonstrate impact. The in-depth manual analysis suggests that GS provides a more nuanced and comprehensive representation of research impact and international scope than the commercial databases.

scholarly journals Pesquisa em psicologia do esporte e o cenário de periódicos científicos específicos

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-99
Author(s):  
Fábio Hech Dominski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
English Language ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Isi Web Of Science ◽  
Current Scenario ◽  
Publication Language ◽  
The Impact

Introdução: É notável o crescimento na produção de conhecimento na área da psicologia do esporte (PE). O conhecimento produzido pelos pesquisadores ocorre através da publicação de seus trabalhos no formato de artigos em periódicos científicos. Não existe na literatura análises considerando os periódicos específicos da área e suas características. Objetivo: Discutir acerca do cenário atual de periódicos específicos relacionados à PE. Métodos: Trata-se de uma pesquisa documental a respeito dos periódicos de PE. Foram extraídos e analisados dados como país, instituição, editora, língua de publicação, as métricas (JCR - ISI Web of Science, SJR, Citescore e SNIP – Scopus, e índice h5 – Google Scholar), periodicidade, período de publicações e número de artigos publicados em 2018. Resultados: Foram observados 14 periódicos na literatura relacionados diretamente a temática da PE. A maioria dos periódicos (5) é dos Estados Unidos, três da Espanha e três do Reino Unido. Brasil, Itália e Holanda apresentaram um periódico cada. A maioria dos periódicos publica na língua inglesa (13 dos 14). O fator de impacto (JCR) dos periódicos variou de 0,64 a 6,90, cinco periódicos não apresentaram essa métrica em 2018. Neste ano, os periódicos publicaram de 11 até 144 artigos. Conclusão: A partir da análise dos periódicos científicos específicos da PE, verificou-se que os de maior qualidade considerando as métricas analisadas, são dos Estados Unidos e da Europa. No Brasil ressalta-se a necessidade de fortalecimento do periódico específico existente na área, que pode ser realizado a partir da unificação das organizações que atuam na prática profissional e na pesquisa científica em PE. ABSTRACT. Sport psychology research and the specific journals scenario. Background: There is a remarkable growth in the production of knowledge in the field of sports psychology (SP). The knowledge produced by researchers occurs through the publication of their work in the format of articles in scientific journals. There are no analyses in the literature considering the specific journals of the area and their characteristics. Objective: To discuss about the current scenario of specific journals related to SP. Methods: This is a documentary research about the SP journals. The following data were extracted and analyzed: country, institution, publisher, publication language, metrics (JCR - ISI Web of Science, SJR, Citescore and SNIP – Scopus, and index h5 – Google Scholar), periodicity, publication period, and number of articles published in 2018. Results: It was observed 14 journals related to SP. Most of them are from United States, three from Spain and three from United Kingdom. Brazil, Italy and Netherlands showed one journal each. Most of the journals publish in English language (13 of 14). The impact factor ranged from 0.64 to 6.90, and five journals do not show this metric in 2018. In this year, the journals published from 11 to 144 articles. Conclusion: From the analysis of the specific scientific journals of the SP, it was found that the journals with highest quality are from the United States and Europe. In Brazil, there is a need to strengthen the existing specific journal in the area, which can be done by unifying the organizations that work in professional practice and scientific research of SP.

scholarly journals Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Martín-Martín ◽  
Enrique Orduna-Malea ◽  
Emilio Delgado López-Cózar
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Large Fraction ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Bibliometric Indicators ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Initial Hypothesis ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Broad Subject ◽  
Highly Cited

This study explores the extent to which bibliometric indicators based on counts of highly-cited documents could be affected by the choice of data source. The initial hypothesis is that databases that rely on journal selection criteria for their document coverage may not necessarily provide an accurate representation of highly-cited documents across all subject areas, while inclusive databases, which give each document the chance to stand on its own merits, might be better suited to identify highly-cited documents. To test this hypothesis, an analysis of 2,515 highly-cited documents published in 2006 that Google Scholar displays in its Classic Papers product is carried out at the level of broad subject categories, checking whether these documents are also covered in Web of Science and Scopus, and whether the citation counts offered by the different sources are similar. The results show that a large fraction of highly-cited documents in the Social Sciences and Humanities (8.6%-28.2%) are invisible to Web of Science and Scopus. In the Natural, Life, and Health Sciences the proportion of missing highly-cited documents in Web of Science and Scopus is much lower. Furthermore, in all areas, Spearman correlation coefficients of citation counts in Google Scholar, as compared to Web of Science and Scopus citation counts, are remarkably strong (.83-.99). The main conclusion is that the data about highly-cited documents available in the inclusive database Google Scholar does indeed reveal significant coverage deficiencies in Web of Science and Scopus in some areas of research. Therefore, using these selective databases to compute bibliometric indicators based on counts of highly-cited documents might produce biased assessments in poorly covered areas.

15. Brand identities, search engines, and secondary markets

2019 ◽  
pp. 390-408
Author(s):  
Andrew Murray
Keyword(s):  
Search Engine ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Brand Identity ◽  
Web Browser ◽  
Secondary Markets ◽  
Domain Names ◽  
Online Branding ◽  
Counterfeit Products ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines brand identities, search engines, and secondary markets and their operation in the information society. It considers jurisdiction and online trademark disputes, as well as search engine optimization and the role of Google and the impact of its search engine services on brand profile and market presence. The chapter goes on to examine secondary markets and the liability of sellers of counterfeit products for the abuse of trademarks. The chapter concludes with a summary of the changing nature of online branding and the diminishing impact of domain names to cement brand identity, as well as the growing influence of developments to web browser functionality on consumer behaviour.

scholarly journals Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for Comprehensive Citation Tracking

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorie Andrea Kloda
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Condensed Matter ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Skewed Distribution ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Systematic Sampling ◽  
Condensed Matter Physics ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Citation Counts

Objective – To determine whether three competing citation tracking services result in differing citation counts for a known set of articles, and to assess the extent of any differences. Design – Citation analysis, observational study. Setting – Three citation tracking databases: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Subjects – Citations from eleven journals each from the disciplines of oncology and condensed matter physics for the years 1993 and 2003. Methods – The researchers selected eleven journals each from the list of journals from Journal Citation Reports 2004 for the categories “Oncology” and “Condensed Matter Physics” using a systematic sampling technique to ensure journals with varying impact factors were included. All references from these 22 journals were retrieved for the years 1993 and 2003 by searching three databases: Web of Science, INSPEC, and PubMed. Only research articles were included for the purpose of the study. From these, a stratified random sample was created to proportionally represent the content of each journal (oncology 1993: 234 references, 2003: 259 references; condensed matter physics 1993: 358 references, 2003: 364 references). In November of 2005, citations counts were obtained for all articles from Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Due to the small sample size and skewed distribution of data, non-parametric tests were conducted to determine whether significant differences existed between sets. Main results – For 1993, mean citation counts were highest in Web of Science for both oncology (mean = 45.3, SD = 77.4) and condensed matter physics (mean = 22.5, SD = 32.5). For 2003, mean citation counts were higher in Scopus for oncology (mean = 8.9, SD = 12.0), and in Web of Science for condensed matter physics (mean = 3.0, SD = 4.0). There was not enough data for the set of citations from Scopus for condensed matter physics for 1993 and it was therefore excluded from analysis. A Friedman test to measure for differences between all remaining groups suggested a significant difference existed, and so pairwise post-hoc comparisons were performed. The Wilcoxon Signed Ranked tests demonstrated significant differences “in citation counts between all pairs (p < 0.001) except between Google Scholar and Scopus for CM physics 2003 (p = 0.119).” The study also looked at the number of unique references from each database, as well as the proportion of overlap for the 2003 citations. In the area of oncology, there was found to be 31% overlap between databases, with Google Scholar including the most unique references (13%), followed by Scopus (12%) and Web of Science (7%). For condensed matter physics, the overlap was lower at 21% and the largest number of unique references was found in Web of Science (21%), with Google Scholar next largest (17%) and Scopus the least (9%). Citing references from Google Scholar were found to originate from not only journals, but online archives, academic repositories, government and non-government white papers and reports, commercial organizations, as well as other sources. Conclusion – The study does not confirm the authors’ hypothesis that differing scholarly coverage would result in different citation counts from the three databases. While there were significant differences in mean citation rates between all pairs of databases except for Google Scholar and Scopus in condensed matter physics for 2003, no one database performed better overall. Different databases performed better for different subjects, as well as for different years, especially Scopus, which only includes references starting in 1996. The results of this study suggest that the best citation database will depend on the years being searched as well as the subject area. For a complete picture of citation behaviour, the authors suggest all three be used.

scholarly journals Cigarettes and Its Effects on Health

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-52
Author(s):  
Ridwan Balatif
Keyword(s):  
Search Engine ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Young Age ◽  
The Body ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Toxic Substances ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Literature Searching ◽  
Quitting Smoking ◽  
The Government

Background: One of the biggest challenges in the world of health is the problem of smoking. In 2018, there was an increase in smokers at the age of 10-18 years by 9.1% compared to 2013, which was 7.2%. It is feared that the increasing number of smokers at a young age will increase the number of non-communicable diseases (NCD) at a young age. Methods: Writing this article uses the method of literature searching from various sources of information including e-books, websites and search engines. The e-books used contain cigarette information and its effects on health, the websites used are the website of the government and WHO to search for prevalence data and other information, and the search engines used are Google Scholar and Pubmed to search information on cigarette content research and its effects on health. Discussion: The content of cigarettes can cause various side effects in almost all organs of the body. Various studies have found that smoking is a risk factor for NCD. Conclusion: Cessation of smoking can save sufferers and also save people around smokers. When a smoker starts quitting smoking, the body will undergo the process of cleaning up toxic substances of cigarettes that have entered the body. Keywords: cigarette, literature searching, NCD     Latar Belakang: Salah satu tantangan terbesar dalam dunia kesehatan ialah masalah rokok. Pada tahun 2018, terjadi peningkatan perokok pada usia 10-18 tahun sebesar 9,1% dibandingkan pada tahun 2013 sebesar 7,2%. Peningkatan jumlah perokok di usia muda ini dikhawatirkan akan meningkatkan jumlah Penyakit Tidak Menular (PTM) di usia muda. Metode: Penulisan artikel ini menggunakan metode pencarian literatur dari berbagai sumber informasi berupa e-book, website dan search engine. E-book yang dipakai memuat informasi rokok dan pengaruhnya kekesehatan, website yang dipakai adalah website pemerintah dan WHO untuk pencarian data prevalensi dan informasi lainnya, dan search engine yang dipakai adalah Google Scholar dan Pubmed untuk pencarian informasi penelitian kandungan rokok dan pengaruhnya kepada kesehatan. Pembahasan: Dari hasil pencarian, kandungan pada rokok dapat menimbulkan berbagai efek samping hampir di seluruh organ tubuh. Berbagai penelitian mendapatkan bahwa kebiasaan merokok merupakan faktor risiko terjadinya PTM. Kesimpulan: Penghentian kebiasaan merokok ini dapat menyelamatkan penderitanya dan juga menyelamatkan orang di sekitar perokok. Ketika seorang perokok mulai berhenti untuk merokok, maka tubuh akan melakukan proses pembersihan dari zat racun pada rokok yang sudah masuk ke dalam tubuh. Kata kunci: rokok, PTM, pencarian literatur

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document