Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for Earth Sciences

In order to measure the degree to which Google Scholar can compete with bibliographical databases, search results from this database is compared with Thomson’s ISI WoS (Institute for Scientific Information, Web of Science). For earth science literature 85% of documents indexed by ISI WoS were recalled by Google Scholar. The rank of records displayed in Google Scholar and ISI WoS, is compared by means of Spearman’s footrule. For impact measures the h-index is investigated. Similarities in measures were significant for the two sources.

[1]  William H. Walters,et al.  Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field , 2007, Inf. Process. Manag..

[2]  S. Redner.  How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution , 1998, cond-mat/9804163.

[3]  Alireza Noruzi.  Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes , 2005 .

[4]  Richard K. Belew,et al.  Scientific impact quantity and quality: Analysis of two sources of bibliographic data , 2005, ArXiv.

[5]  松田 直人.  『Google Scholar』の利点 , 2009 .

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

[7]  Lokman I. Meho,et al.  Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar , 2007 .

[8]  Jerome K. Vanclay,et al.  On the robustness of the h-index , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Some measures for comparing citation databases , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[10]  E. Garfield.  How ISI selects journals for coverage: Quantitative and qualitative considerations , 1990 .

[11]  Daniel Pauly,et al.  Equivalence of results from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI's Citation Index and Google's Scholar service , 2005 .

[12]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[13]  Chris Neuhaus,et al.  The Depth and Breadth of Google Scholar: An Empirical Study , 2006 .

[14]  Péter Jacsó,et al.  Deflated, inflated and phantom citation counts , 2006, Online Inf. Rev..

[15]  P. Jacsó.  As we may search : Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases , 2005 .

[16]  Lokman I. Meho,et al.  Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..