Science is all in the eye of the beholder: Keyword maps in Google scholar citations

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 63, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 2370-2377

  Ortega, José Luis ^a   Aguillo, Isidro F ^b  

^a CSIC   (Spain)

^b INSTITUTO DE HISTORIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

bibliometrics; webometrics

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOMETRICS; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; KEYWORD MAPS; NETWORK GRAPH; RESEARCH ACTIVITIES; WEBOMETRICS;

BIOINFORMATICS;

INFORMATION SCIENCE;

EID: 84870521644     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.22761     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Aguillo, I.F., (2012). Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis. Scientometrics, 91 (2), 343-351.
2. 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 (7). http://www.bio-diglib.com/content/3/1/7.
3. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., &, Jacomy, M., (2009). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In Proceedings of the Third International ICWSM Conference, (pp. 361-362). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
4. Bollen, J., &, Van de Sompel, H., (2006). Mapping the structure of science through usage. Scientometrics, 69 (2), 227-258.
5. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., Bettencourt, L., Chute, R., Rodriguez, M.A., &, Balakireva, L., (2009). Clickstream data yields high-resolution maps of science. PLoS ONE, 4 (3), e4803.
6. Boyack, K.W., &, Klavans, R., (2008). Measuring science-technology interaction using rare inventor-author names. Journal of Informetrics, 2 (3), 173-182.
7. Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., &, Börner, K., (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64 (3), 351-374.
8. Engelsman, E.C., &, van Raan, A.F.J., (1994). A patent-based cartography of technology. Research Policy, 23 (1), 1-26.
9. Freeman, L.C., (1979). Centrality in networks: I. conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215-239.
10. Freeman, L.C., (1980). The gatekeeper, pair-dependency, and structural centrality. Quality and Quantity, 14, 585-592.
11. Garfield E., Sher I.H., &, Torpie R.J., (1964). The use of citation data in writing the history of science. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.
12. Google Scholar blog. (2011a). Google Scholar Citations. http://googlescholar.blogspot.com/2011/07/google-scholar-citations.html.
13. Google Scholar blog. (2011b). Google Scholar Citations open to all. http://googlescholar.blogspot.com/2011/11/google-scholar-citations-open-to-all. html.
14. Holloway, T., BožičeviÄ, M., &, Börner, K., (2007). Analyzing and visualizing the semantic coverage of Wikipedia and its authors. Complexity, 12 (3), 30-40.
15. Jacsõ, P., (2008). Google Scholar revisited. Online Information Review, 32 (1), 102-114.
16. Klavans, R., &, Boyack, K.W., (2007). Is there a convergent structure of science? A comparison of maps using the ISI and Scopus databases. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 437-448). Madrid: CSIC.
17. 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.
18. Leydesdorff, L., &, Rafols, I., (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (2), 348-362.
19. Meho, L.I., &, Yang, K., (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (13), 2105-2125.
20. Moya-Anegõn, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Corera-Alvarez, E., &, Herrero-Solana, V., (2007). Visualizing the marrow of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (14), 2167-2179.
21. Newman, M.E.J., (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (23), 8577-8582.
22. Ortega, J.L., &, Aguillo, I., (2007). Interdisciplinary relationships in the Spanish academic web space: A Webometric study through networks visualization. Cybermetrics, 11 (1), paper 4. http://www.cybermetrics.info/ articles/v11i1p4.html.
23. Rosvall, M., &, Bergstrom, C.T., (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105 (4), 1118-1123.
24. Scopus (2008). Subject area categories. http://www.scopus.com.
25. Seber, G.A.F., (2002). The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. Caldwell, NJ: Blackburn Press.
26. Seidman, S.B., (1983). Network structure and minimum degree. Social Networks, 5 (3), 269-287.
27. Small, H., Sweeney, E., &, Greenlee, E., (1985). Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations. II. Mapping science. Scientometrics, 8 (5-6), 321-340.
28. Waldrop, M.M., (2008). Science 2.0. Scientific American 298, 68-73.
29. Watts, D.J., &, Strogatz, S.H., (1998). Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature, 393, 440-442.