Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Google Scholar for Bibliometrics
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Google Scholar for Bibliometrics

2,093
views

Published on

Google Scholar: Can it Really Be Used for Bibliometrics? by Isobel Stark and Michael Whitton, University of Southampton. Presentation at the Research Evaluation: Is It Our Business? The Role of …

Google Scholar: Can it Really Be Used for Bibliometrics? by Isobel Stark and Michael Whitton, University of Southampton. Presentation at the Research Evaluation: Is It Our Business? The Role of Librarians in the Brave New World of Research Evaluation 29 June 2011, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston Campus.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business

0 Comments
6 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,093
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
75
Comments
0
Likes
6
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Metrics are generally a higher number - Bibliometrics calculated on GS are generally higher than those calculated on (eg.) WoS, but this varies by discipline
  • Google Scholar *was* designed for bibliometrics, just not necessarily for g-index and h-index (it does citation counting
  • Quadsearch http://quadsearch.csd.auth.gr/index.php?lan=1&s=2 (i.e. the ‘Science’ search) Scholar H-index Calculator https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/45283 (add-on for the Mozilla Firefox browser, adds metrics to the standard Google Scholar site, easy to use but only calculates for the articles on the current page, a maximum of 100) Scholarometer http://scholarometer.indiana.edu/ (add-on for the Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome browsers – appears as a sidebar when installed) Publish or Perish http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm (application that calculates a wide variety of metrics
  • CVs – h-index increasingly mandated for Performance/Personal Development Reviews
  • BAR-ILAN, J. 2008. Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics , 74, 257-271. JACSO, P. 2008. The pros and cons of computing the h-index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32 , 437-452.
  • 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. Academics at University of Udine, high impact computer science journals LEVINE-CLARK, M. & GIL, E. 2009. A comparative analysis of social sciences citation tools. Online Information Review, 33, 986-996. Highly downloaded articles from Elsevier social sciences journals
  • LEE, J., KRAUS, K. L. & COULDWELL, W. T. 2009. Use of thehindex in neurosurgery. Journal of Neurosurgery, 111 , 387-392. Research outputs from 3 UK Business schools 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. Random sample of academic neurosurgeons
  • 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 to compliment our Open Access, e-theses, Academic Copyright and Current Awareness sessions
  • Google Scholar’s subject classification is variable – fails to correctly classify some, thus reducing recall and therefore calculated h-index
  • Transcript

    • 1. Google Scholar Can it really be used for bibliometrics?
      • Isobel Stark & Michael Whitton June 2011
    • 2. Google Scholar
      • Historical background?
        • Google Scholar released (in beta) in 2004
        • Not the first freely available citation database (CiteSeer, Scirus, etc)
        • Not subject specific
      • Is it a viable alternative to ‘traditional’ citation databases such as Web of Science?
    • 3. 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
    • 4. 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.
    • 5. 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)
    • 6.  
    • 7.  
    • 8.  
    • 9.  
    • 10. How our researchers use it
      • CVs and bids for funding
      • Preferred by Medicine over InCites
      • Factsheet for “Finding your h -index in Google Scholar” is very popular
        • 6,764 visits in the last year
        • To compare WoS h -Index guide is 1,559 and Impact Factors 1,045
    • 11. From the literature …
      • Bar-Illan (2008) – Israeli highly cited researchers
        • Significant differences from WoS 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
    • 12. 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 WoS
        • Significant value in journals not indexed by WoS & coverage of books
    • 13. 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.
    • 14. The h -index: WoS vs Google Scholar
      • Prof. Nigel Shadbolt (Computer Science)
        • WoS: 16
        • Google Scholar: 23
      • Dr Simon Coles (Chemistry)
        • WoS: 36
        • Google Scholar 22
    • 15. The h -index: WoS vs Google Scholar …
      • Prof. Sally Brailsford (Management)
        • WoS: 9
        • Google Scholar: 13
      • Prof. Christian Ottensmeier (Medicine)
        • WoS: 19
        • Google Scholar: 19
    • 16. The h -index: WoS vs Google Scholar …
      • Prof. Jane Falkingham (Social Sciences)
        • WoS: 7
        • Google Scholar: 23
      • Dr Joanna Sofaer (Archaeology)
        • WoS: 2
        • Google Scholar: 9
    • 17. 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
    • 18. 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
    • 19. References
      • BAR-ILAN, J. 2008. Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics , 74, 257-271.
      • 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 h-index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32 , 437-452.
    • 20. 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.

    ×