bibliographic database analysis; geographical literature; Google Scholar; Web of Science; FRANCIS; GeoRef
Résumé :
[en] This study aims to highlight what benefits, if any, Google Scholar (GS) has for academic literature searches in the field of geography, compared to three commercial bibliographic databases: Web of Science (WoS) and FRANCIS (multidisciplinary databases) and GeoRef (specialized in geosciences). To ensure a valid comparison, identical bibliographic searches were applied using each of the four bibliographic tools. To exclude automatic variations of the ten keywords tested, they were placed between quotation marks and searched only in the “title” field of the respective search tools’ interfaces. The results were limited to bibliographic references published from 2005 to 2009. In order to assess the repeatability of the results, the exact same process was repeated monthly between November 2010 and July 2011. Initially the whole set of results was analyzed, after which the search results for two keywords (selected since they yielded a manageable number of results) were studied in more detail. The results indicate that GS search results show a large degree of overlap with those of the other databases but, moreover, yield numerous unique hits, which should be useful to researchers in both the fields of human and physical geography. GS leads the other tools widely on number of results, independently of keyword, subfield, year of publication, or time of search.
Disciplines :
Bibliothéconomie & sciences de l’information
Auteur, co-auteur :
Stirbu, Simona ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Bibliothèque des Sciences et Techniques
Thirion, Paul ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Réseau des Bibliothèques : Direction générale
Schmitz, Serge ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de géographie > Service de géographie rurale (LAPLEC)
Haesbroeck, Gentiane ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de mathématique > Statistique mathématique
Greco, Ninfa ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Bibliothèque des Sciences et Techniques
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
The utility of Google Scholar when searching geographical literature: comparison with three commercial bibliographic databases
Bar-Ilan J. An ego-centric citation analysis of the works of Michael O. Rabin based on multiple citation indexes. Information Processing and Management 2006, 42(6):1553-1566.
Bar-Ilan J. Which h-index? - A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 2008, 74(2):257-271.
Bar-Ilan J., Levene M., Lin A. Some measures for comparing citation databases. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1(1):26-34.
Bauer K., Bakkalbasi N. An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment. D-Lib magazine 2005, 11 (Issue 9).
Brown B.N. A comparative analysis of geoscience literature databases. Geological Society of America 2009 annual meeting 2009, Paper presented at the, Boulder, CO, United States.
Chen X. Google Scholar's dramatic coverage improvement five years after debut. Serials Review 2010, 36(4):221-226. 10.1016/j.serrev.2010.08.002.
Chen X. The declining value of subscription-based abstracting and indexing services in the new knowledge dissemination era. Serials Review 2010, 36(2):79-85. 10.1016/j.serrev.2010.02.010.
Cusker J. Elsevier Compendex and Google Scholar: A quantitative comparison of two resources for engineering research and an update to prior comparisons. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2013, 39(3):241-243. 10.1016/j.acalib.2013.02.001.
Falagas M.E., Pitsouni E.I., Malietzis G.A., Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal 2008, 22(2):338-342.
FRANCIS FRANCIS. Retrieved 20 October 2014 (from). http://www.inist.fr/?article23.
Gardner S., Eng S. Gaga over Google? Scholar in the social sciences. Library Hi Tech News 2005, 22(8):42-45.
GeoRef GeoRef. Retrieved 19 October 2014 (from). http://www.agiweb.org/georef/.
Gluck M. A review of journal coverage overlap with an extension to the definition of overlap. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1990, 41(1):43-60.
GoogleScholar GoogleScholar. Retrieved 15 October 2014 (from). http://scholar.google.be/intl/en/scholar/about.html.
Hood W.W., Wilson C.S. Overlap in bibliographic databases. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2003, 54(12):1091-1103.
Jacsó P. Google scholar: The pros and the cons. Online Information Review 2005, 29(2):208-214.
Jacsó P. Google Scholar revisited. Online Information Review 2008, 32(1):102-114. 10.1108/14684520810866010.
Jones D.Y. Biology article retrieval from various databases: Making good choices with limited resources. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship 2005, 44. (N.PAG.).
Lohonen J., Isohanni M., Nieminen P., Miettunen J. Coverage of the bibliographic databases in mental health research. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 2010, 64(3):181-188. 10.3109/08039480903337378.
Meier J.J., Conkling T.W. Google Scholar's coverage of the engineering literature: An empirical study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2008, 34(3):196-201. 10.1016/j.acalib.2008.03.002.
Mikki S. Google Scholar compared to Web of Science: A literature review. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education 2009, 1(1):41-51.
Mikki S. Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for earth sciences. Scientometrics 2010, 82(2):321-331. 10.1007/s11192-009-0038-6.
Mingers J., Lipitakis E. Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics 2010, 85(2):613-625.
Musser L.R. Comparison of GeoRef and Google Scholar. 43rd meeting of the Geoscience Information Society. Symposium on: Libraries in transformation: Exploring topics of changing practices and new technologies 2008, Paper presented at the, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD 21218., (Houston, TX, United States).
Neuhaus C., Neuhaus E., Asher A., Wrede C. The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: An empirical study. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2006, 6(2):127-141.
Notess G.R. Scholarly web searching: Google Scholar and Scirus. Online 2005, 29(4):39-41.
Robinson M.L., Wusteman J. Putting Google Scholar to the test: A preliminary study. Program: electronic library and information systems 2007, 41(1):71-80.
Walters W.H. Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Information Processing and Management 2007, 43(4):1121-1132.
Walters W.H. Comparative recall and precision of simple and expert searches in Google Scholar and eight other databases. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2011, 11(4):972-1006.
Web of Science. Retrieved 20 October 2014, from . http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science:products/a-z/web_of_science/.
