Strengths and weaknesses of the main scientific information databases from a bibliometric perspective
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present papers studies the most relevant scientific information databases at regional and international level from the perspective of their characteristics and functionalities. The main objective is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of this secondary sources through the analysis of their indexing capabilities, coverage, interoperability and scientific information search and recovery for the bibliometric activity. On the basis of information observation and collection from each database website, two ad hoc design tables are developed in order to analyse and compare their performance according to a series of dimensions that cover from formal aspects (origin, purpose, scope) to functional aspects (access, format, quality). Reflection on the contribution of these sources to the matrix construction that allow the development and calculation of indicators for scientific activity evaluation is made. A strong tendency of the systems towards the search and recovery service for bibliographic research, without added value for the reuse of data, is observed. It is concluded that most of the studied systems require hard work on the restructuring and enrichment of the records so that their data export services constitute true tools for bibliometric research.
Downloads
Article Details
References
Alonso Gamboa, J., y Cetto, A. M. (2015). Latindex: revistas científicas iberoamericanas y cooperación regional. Ciência da informação, 44(2). Recuperado de http://revista.ibict.br/ciinf/article/view/1772/2366
Alperin, J. P. y Fischman, G. (Eds.) (2015). Hecho en Latinoamérica: acceso abierto, revistas académicas e innovaciones regionales. Buenos Aires: CLACSO. Recuperado de http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/se/20150722110704/HechoEnLatinoamerica.pdf
AmeliCA (2020). Acerca de AmeliCA. Recuperado de http://amelica.org/index.php/que-es-ameli/
Beigel, M. F. y Salatino, M. (2015). Circuitos segmentados de consagración académica: las revistas de ciencias sociales y humanas en la Argentina. Información, cultura y sociedad, 32, 11-36. https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i32.1342
Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J. y Wang, L. (2006). Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical digital libraries, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-7
De Filippo, D., Sanz-Casado, E., Urbano Salido, C., Ardanuy, J. y Gómez-Caridad, I. (2011). El papel de las bases de datos institucionales en el análisis de la actividad científica de las universidades. Revista española de documentación científica, 34(2), 165-189. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2011.2.797
De La Laurencie, A. y Maddi, A. (2019). The dynamics of French publications in social sciences and humanities: a European comparison. In Sapienza University of Rome (Ed.). 17th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics. Efesto, Italy.
Delgado, E. y Repiso, R. (2013). El impacto de las revistas de comunicación: comparando Google Scholar Metrics, Web of Science y Scopus. Comunicar, 21(41), 45-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-04
Escalona, I., Cerdá Hernández, M. P. y Pulgarín, A. (2010). Web of Science vs. Scopus: un estudio cuantitativo en ingeniería química. Anales de documentación, 13, 159-175.
Fingerman, S. (2005). Web of Science and Scopus: current features and capabilities. Issues in science and technology librarianship, 48.
Gireesh Kumar, T.K. (2013). Comparative analysis of search features of Scopus and Web of Science. In National Conference on Information Products and Services in the E- environment (NACINPROSE 2013), Hyderabad, India. Retrieved from http://eprints.rclis.org/19731/1/2013%20Gireeesh-Scopus.pdf
Gorraiz, J., y Schloegl, C. (2007). A bibliometric analysis of pharmacology and pharmacy journals: Scopus versus Web of Science. Journal of information science, 10(20), 1-11.
Harzing, A. W. (2007). Publish or perish. Retrieved from https://harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish
Gusenbauer, M. (2018). Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics, 118, 177-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5
Jacson, P. (2005). As we may search–Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases. Current science, 89(9), 1537-1547.
Jiménez Noblejas, C., y Perianes Rodríguez, A. (2014) Recuperación y visualización de información en Web of Science y Scopus: una aproximación práctica. Investigación bibliotecológica, 28(64), 15-31. Recuperado de http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/ib/v28n64/v28n64a2.pdf
Kulczycki, E., Engels, T. C. E., Pölönen, J., Bruun, K., Duskova, M., Guns, R., y Zuccala, A. (2018). Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: evidence from eight European countries. Scientometrics, 116, 463-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2711-0
LaGuardia, C. (2010). E-Views and Reviews: Scopus vs. Web of Science. Library journal. Recuperado de https://www.libraryjournal.com/?detailStory=e-views-and-reviews-scopus-vs-web-of-science
Martín Martín, A., Orduna Malea, E., Thelwall, M. y López Cózar, E. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of informetrics, 12(4), 1160-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002
Meho, L. I., y Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation Counts and rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/asi.20677
Michán Aguirre, L., Calderón Rojas, R., Nitxin Castañeda Sortibrán, A. y Rodríguez Arnáiz, R. (2014). Aplicaciones web para recuperación y análisis de literatura de PubMed. El profesional de la información, 19(3), 285-291. Recuperado de http://www.elprofesionaldelainformacion.com/contenidos/2010/mayo/08.pdf
Miguel, S. E., de Moya Anegón, F. y Herrero Solana, V. (2006) Aproximación metodológica para la identificación del perfil y patrones de colaboración de dominios científicos universitarios. Revista española de documentación científica, 29(1), 36-55. Recuperado de http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/89953
Mingers, J. and Lipitakis, E. (2010). Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85(2), 613-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0
Mongeon, P. and Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106, 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Mosbah Natanson, S. and Gingras, Y. (2014). The globalization of social sciences? Evidence from a quantitative analysis of 30 years of production, collaboration and citations in the social sciences (1980–2009). Current sociology, 62(5), 626-646. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113498866
Orduña Malea, E., Martín Martín, A., Ayllón, J. M., y Delgado López Cózar, E. (2016) La revolución Google Scholar: destapando la caja de Pandora académica. Madrid: UNE.
Puente Lanzarote, L., del Campo Hilario, C. y Ruiz de Luzuriaga Peña, M. (2001). Indicadores de rendimiento para la evaluación de un servicio de bases de datos en línea. Scire, 7(1), 89-114. Recuperado de http://eprints.rclis.org/14991/1/Puente-Indicadores.pdf
Rafols, I., Chavarro, D. and Ciarli, T. (2016). Under-representation of research in the global south. Biases in mainstream journal indexing systems. En International Research Conference on Scientometrics, STI Policy and Science Communication, Stellenbosch, Sudáfrica. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10261/162452
Somoza, M., Guallar, J., Rodríguez Gairín, J. M. y Abadal, E. (2017). Presencia de revistas españolas en bases de datos internacionales. En Revistas científicas: situación actual y retos de futuro (pp. 161-178). Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona.
Torres Salinas, D., Jiménez Contreras, E. and Delgado López Cózar, E. (2009). Rankings for departments and researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus SCOPUS. Scientometrics, 80, 761–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2113-9
Torres Salinas, D., Ruiz Pérez, R. y Delgado López Cózar, E. (2009). Google Scholar como herramienta para la evaluación científica. El profesional de la información, 18(5), 501-510.
Worwell, I. (2001). Informetría: explorando bases de datos como instrumentos de análisis. ACIMED, 9. Recuperado de http://eprints.rclis.org/5174/1/sci17100.pdf