Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science Citations: Case of Malaysian Engineering Highly Cited Papers - E-LIS repository

Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science Citations: Case of Malaysian Engineering Highly Cited Papers

Ale Ebrahim, Nader and Salehi, Hadi and Embi, Mohamed Amin and Danaee, Mahmoud and Mohammadjafari, Marjan and Zavvari, Azam and Shakiba, Masoud and Shahbazi-Moghadam, Masoomeh
Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science Citations: Case of Malaysian Engineering Highly Cited Papers.
Modern Applied Science, 2014, vol. 8, n. 5, pp. 63-69.









[Journal article (Print/Paginated)]

Text Equality of Google Scholar.pdf Download (205Kb)

Official URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2477611 http://eprints.um...

English abstract

This study
uses citation analysis from two citation tracking databases, Google
Scholar (GS) and ISI Web of Science, in order to test the correlation
between them and examine the effect of the number of paper versions on
citations. The data were retrieved from the Essential Science Indicators
and Google Scholar for 101 highly cited papers from Malaysia in the
field of engineering. An equation for estimating the citation in ISI
based on Google scholar is offered. The results show a significant and
positive relationship between both citation in Google Scholar and ISI
Web of Science with the number of versions. This relationship is higher
between versions and ISI citations (r = 0.395, p<0.01) than between
versions and Google Scholar citations (r = 0.315, p<0.01). Free
access to data provided by Google Scholar and the correlation to get ISI
citation which is costly, allow more transparency in tenure reviews,
funding agency and other science policy, to count citations and analyze
scholars’ performance more precisely.

Item type:	Journal article (Print/Paginated)
Keywords:	Bibliometrics, Citation analysis, Evaluations, Equivalence, Google Scholar, High cited, ISI Web of Science, Research tools, H-index
Subjects:	C. Users, literacy and reading. > CD. User training, promotion, activities, education. G. Industry, profession and education. > GH. Education.
Depositing user:	Dr. Nader Ale Ebrahim
Date deposited:	16 Aug 2014 00:14
Last modified:	16 Aug 2014 00:14
URI:	http://hdl.handle.net/10760/23646

Check full metadata for this record

References

"SEEK" links will first look for possible matches inside E-LIS and query Google Scholar if no results are found.

Aghaei
Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M.,
Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main
Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases.
Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18-26.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18

Aguillo,
I. F. (2011). Is Google Scholar useful for Bibliometrics? A Webometric
Analysis. In E. Noyons, P. Ngulube & J. Leta (Eds.), Proceedings of
Issi 2011: The 13th Conference of the International Society for
Scientometrics and Informetrics, Vols 1 and 2 (pp. 19-25). Leuven: Int
Soc Scientometrics & Informetrics-Issi.

Ale
Ebrahim, N. (2013). Introduction to the Research Tools Mind Map.
Research World, 10(4), 1-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7712

Ale
Ebrahim, N., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2009). Virtual Teams: a
Literature Review. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences,
3(3), 2653-2669. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1067906

Ale
Ebrahim, N., Salehi, H., Embi, M. A., Habibi Tanha, F., Gholizadeh, H.,
& Motahar, S. M. (2014). Visibility and Citation Impact.
International Education Studies, 7(4), 120-125.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n4p120

Ale
Ebrahim, N., Salehi, H., Embi, M. A., Habibi Tanha, F., Gholizadeh, H.,
Motahar, S. M., & Ordi, A. (2013). Effective Strategies for
Increasing Citation Frequency. International Education Studies, 6(11),
93-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n11p93

Amancio,
D. R., Oliveira Jr, O. N., & da Fontoura Costa, L. (2012).
Three-feature model to reproduce the topology of citation networks and
the effects from authors’ visibility on their h-index. Journal of
Informetrics, 6(3), 427-434. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.02.005

Antelman,
K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact?
College & Research Libraries 65(5), 372-382.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl.65.5.372

Bakkalbasi,
N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006). Three options for
citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical
Digital Libraries, 3(1), 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-7

Bensman,
S. (2011). Anne-Wil Harzing: The publish or perish book: Your guide to
effective and responsible citation analysis. Scientometrics 88(1),
339-342. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0388-8

Bornmann,
L., Marx, W., Schier, H., Rahm, E., Thor, A., & Daniel, H. D.
(2009). Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the
field of chemistry-Citation counts for papers that were accepted by
Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published
elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and
Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics, 3(1), 27-35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.11.001

Cabezas-Clavijo,
A., & Delgado-Lopez-Cozar, E. (2013). Google Scholar and the
h-index in biomedicine: The popularization of bibliometric assessment.
Medicina Intensiva, 37(5), 343-354.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.medin.2013.01.008

Craig,
I. D., Plume, A. M., McVeigh, M. E., Pringle, J., & Amin, M.
(2007). Do open access articles have greater citation impact?: A
critical review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3),
239-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.04.001

Egghe,
L., Guns, R., & Rousseau, R. (2013). Measuring co-authors'
contribution to an article's visibility. Scientometrics 95(1), 55-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0832-4

Ertürk,
K., & Şengül, G. (2012). Self Archiving in Atılım University. In S.
Kurbanoğlu, U. Al, P. Erdoğan, Y. Tonta & N. Uçak (Eds.), E-Science
and Information Management (Vol. 317, pp. 79-86): Springer Berlin
Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33299-9_11

Fooladi,
M., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, M., Aghaei Chadegani, A.,
Farhadi, H., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). Do Criticisms Overcome the
Praises of Journal Impact Factor? Asian Social Science, 9(5), 176-182.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p176

Garfield,
E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science
178, :471-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.178.4060.471

Hardy, R., Oppenheim, C., Brody, T., & Hitchcock, S. (2005). Open Access Citation Information.

Hooper, S. L. (2012). Citations: not all measures are equal. Nature 483(7387), 36-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/483036c

Jacso,
P. (2012). Google Scholar Metrics for Publications The software and
content features of a new open access bibliometric service. Online
Information Review 36(4), 604-619.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521211254121

Kear,
R., & Colbert-Lewis, D. (2011). Citation searching and bibliometric
measures: Resources for ranking and tracking. College & Research
Libraries News, 72(8), 470-474.

Kousha,
K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Google Scholar citations and Google
Web-URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7),
1055-1065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.v58:7

Larsen,
P. O., & von Ins, M. (2010). The rate of growth in scientific
publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation
Index. Scientometrics 84(3), 575-603.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z

Lawrence,
S. (2001a). Free online availability substantially increases a paper's
impact. Nature 411(6837), 521-521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35079151

Lawrence, S. (2001b). Online or invisible. Nature 411(6837), 521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35079151

McCabe,
M. J., & Snyder, C. M. (2013). Does Online Availability Increase
Citations? Theory and Evidence from a Panel of Economics and Business
Journals: SSRN working paper.

Orduña-Malea,
E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). Google Scholar Metrics
evolution: an analysis according to languages. Scientometrics 98(3),
2353-2367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1164-8

Pauly,
D., & Stergiou, K. I. (2005). Equivalence of results from two
citation analyses: Thomson ISI’s Citation Index and Google’s Scholar
service. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 5, 33-35.

Rotich,
D. C., & Musakali, J. J. (2013). Publish or Perish: Remaining
Academically Relevant and Visible In the Global Academic Scene through
Scholarly Publishing. Paper presented at the Conference and Programme
Chairs, South Africa.

Solomon,
D. J., Laakso, M., & Björk, B.-C. (2013). A longitudinal comparison
of citation rates and growth among open access journals. Journal of
Informetrics, 7(3), 642-650.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1164-8

The
Thomson Corporation. (2013). Essential Science Indicators, Product
Overview. from http://esi.webofknowledge.com/help//h_whatis.htm

Yue,
W. P., & Wilson, C. S. (2004). Measuring the citation impact of
research journals in clinical neurology: A structural equation modelling
analysis. Scientometrics 60(3), 317-332.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034377.93437.18

Zhang,
C.-T. (2009). The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess
Citations. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5429.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005429

Zheng,
J., Zhao, Z. Y., Zhang, X., Chen, D. Z., Huang, M. H., Lei, X. P., . . .
Zhao, Y. H. (2012). International scientific and technological
collaboration of China from 2004 to 2008: a perspective from paper and
patent analysis. Scientometrics 91(1), 65-80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0529-0


Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science Citations: Case of Malaysian Engineering Highly Cited Papers - E-LIS repository