The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis

Traditionally, Web of Science and Scopus have been the two most widely used databases for bibliometric analyses. However, during the last few years some new scholarly databases, such as Dimensions, have come up. Several previous studies have compared different databases, either through a direct comparison of article coverage or by comparing the citations across the databases. This article attempts to compare the journal coverage of the three databases: Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. The most recent master journal lists of the three databases have been used for the purpose of identifying the overlapping and unique journals covered in the databases. The results indicate that the databases have significantly different journal coverage, with the Web of Science being most selective and Dimensions being the most exhaustive. About 99.11% and 96.61% of the journals indexed in Web of Science are also indexed in Scopus and Dimensions, respectively. Scopus has 96.42% of its indexed journals also covered by Dimensions. Dimensions database has the most exhaustive coverage, with 82.22% more journals covered as compared to Web of Science and 48.17% more journals covered as compared to Scopus. We also analysed the research outputs for 20 highly productive countries for the 2010-2019 period, as indexed in the three databases, and identified database-induced variations in research output volume, rank and global share of different countries. In addition to variations in overall coverage of research output from different countries, the three databases appear to have differential coverage of different disciplines.

[1]  Dag W. Aksnes,et al.  A Criteria-based Assessment of the Coverage of Scopus and Web of Science , 2019, J. Data Inf. Sci..

[2]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar , 2008, Scientometrics.

[3]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus , 2008, J. Informetrics.

[4]  Dimensons Team,et al.  A Guide to the Dimensions Data Approach , 2018 .

[5]  Saif Aldeen S AlRyalat,et al.  Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases. , 2019, Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE.

[6]  Grégoire Côté,et al.  Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies , 2020, Quantitative Science Studies.

[7]  John Mingers,et al.  Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management , 2010, Scientometrics.

[8]  David A. Pendlebury,et al.  Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity , 2020, Quantitative Science Studies.

[9]  Anne-Wil Harzing,et al.  Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison , 2015, Scientometrics.

[10]  Rajesh Piryani,et al.  Revisiting subject classification in academic databases: A comparison of the classification accuracy of Web of Science, Scopus & Dimensions , 2020, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[11]  Christian Herzog,et al.  Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation , 2018, Front. Res. Metr. Anal..

[12]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[13]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Comparing bibliometric country-by-country rankings derived from the Web of Science and Scopus: the effect of poorly cited journals in oncology , 2009, J. Inf. Sci..

[14]  Anne-Wil Harzing Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science? , 2019, Scientometrics.

[15]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Web of Science, Scopus, Dimensions, and Crossref , 2019, ISSI.

[16]  Adèle Paul-Hus,et al.  The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis , 2015, Scientometrics.

[17]  Enrique Orduña-Malea,et al.  Dimensions: re-discovering the ecosystem of scientific information , 2018, ArXiv.

[18]  Marta Somoza-Fernández,et al.  Journal coverage of the Emerging Sources Citation Index , 2018, Learn. Publ..

[19]  Stacy Konkiel,et al.  Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data , 2020, Quantitative Science Studies.

[20]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  Dimensions: A Competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[21]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations , 2021, Scientometrics.

[22]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses , 2007, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[23]  Lars Iselid,et al.  Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study , 2008, Online Inf. Rev..

[24]  Elizabeth S. Vieira,et al.  A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university , 2009, Scientometrics.

[25]  Nees Jan van Eck,et al.  Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic , 2020, Quantitative Science Studies.

[26]  Philipp Mayr,et al.  An exploratory study of Google Scholar , 2007, Online Inf. Rev..

[27]  Chris Rensleigh,et al.  Comparing Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar from an Environmental Sciences perspective , 2011 .

[28]  Joost C. F. de Winter,et al.  The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study , 2013, Scientometrics.

[29]  Chris Rensleigh,et al.  Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison , 2013, Electron. Libr..

[30]  Enrique Orduña-Malea,et al.  Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison , 2018, Scientometrics.

[31]  Masood Fooladi,et al.  A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases , 2013, ArXiv.

[32]  Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras,et al.  Ranking of departments and researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus Scopus , 2009, Scientometrics.

[33]  Lokman I. Meho,et al.  Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science , 2007, Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.