Google Scholar Can it really be used for bibliometrics? Isobel Stark & Michael Whitton June 2011
Google Scholar • Historical background? – Google Scholar released (in beta) in 2004 – Not the first freely available citation database (Cite. Seer, Scirus, etc) – Not subject specific • Is it a viable alternative to ‘traditional’ citation databases such as Web of Science? 2
Pros of Google Scholar • Easy to access and free • Indexes a wide range of articles – Especially Law, Humanities, Social Sciences • Can find a wider range of metrics • Metrics are generally a higher number 3
Cons of Google Scholar • Questionable data • Lack of de-duplication • Gaps • Relies on algorithms • Not designed for popular bibliometric measures – Requires add-ons to calculate h-index etc. 4
Recommended services (h-index on GS) • Quadsearch (Any browser) • Scholar H-index Calculator (Mozilla Firefox) • Scholarometer (Mozilla Firefox/Google Chrome) • Publish or Perish (Separate Application) 5
How our researchers use it • CVs and bids for funding • Preferred by Medicine over In. Cites • Factsheet for “Finding your h-index in Google Scholar” is very popular – 6, 764 visits in the last year – To compare Wo. S h-Index guide is 1, 559 and Impact Factors 1, 045 10
From the literature … • Bar-Illan (2008) – Israeli highly cited researchers – Significant differences from Wo. S and Scopus – Metrics can be higher (computer science), similar or lower (physics) • Jasco (2008) – Problems of missing & wrong authors – Prolific authors F Password & M Profile – Specific problems often resolved 11
Subject specific studies • Franceshet (2009) – Computer Science – Google Scholar metrics are much higher – Significant correlation (but varies by type of metric) – Importance of proceedings • Levine-Clark (2009) – Social Sciences – Significant value of using Google Scholar in addition to Wo. S – Significant value in journals not indexed by Wo. S & coverage of books 12
Subject specific studies … • Lee (2009) – Neurosurgery – Significant correlation between Google Scholar and Scopus • Mingers (2010) – Business & Management – Lack of reliability and transparency of Google Scholar, but potential for a more comprehensive and less subject dependant analysis. 13
The h-index: Wo. S vs Google Scholar • Prof. Nigel Shadbolt (Computer Science) – Wo. S: 16 – Google Scholar: 23 • Dr Simon Coles (Chemistry) – Wo. S: 36 – Google Scholar 22 14
The h-index: Wo. S vs Google Scholar … • Prof. Sally Brailsford (Management) – Wo. S: 9 – Google Scholar: 13 • Prof. Christian Ottensmeier (Medicine) – Wo. S: 19 – Google Scholar: 19 15
The h-index: Wo. S vs Google Scholar … • Prof. Jane Falkingham (Social Sciences) – Wo. S: 7 – Google Scholar: 23 • Dr Joanna Sofaer (Archaeology) – Wo. S: 2 – Google Scholar: 9 16
Supporting bibliometrics • Library research guides – www. soton. ac. uk/library/research/bibliometrics • Deskside training – 1 -2 -1 training for staff & research postgraduates • Planned session for research postgraduates – delivered through the Graduate School training programme 17
Conclusions • Some variation by subject • Significant issues with quality of the data • Can be useful to use in addition to Web of Science and/or Scopus 18
References • BAR-ILAN, J. 2008. Which h-index? — A comparison of Wo. S, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74, 257271. • FRANCESCHET, M. 2009. A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 83, 243 -258. • JACSO, P. 2008. The pros and cons of computing the hindex using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32, 437 -452. 19
References … • LEVINE-CLARK, M. & GIL, E. 2009. A comparative analysis of social sciences citation tools. Online Information Review, 33, 986 -996. • LEE, J. , KRAUS, K. L. & COULDWELL, W. T. 2009. Use of the h index in neurosurgery. Journal of Neurosurgery, 111, 387 -392. • MINGERS, J. & LIPITAKIS, E. A. E. C. G. 2010. Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85, 613 -625. 20
Скачать презентацию Google Scholar Can it really be used for
f5c5efa233d6a2ab5ec898d733797294.ppt