The impact of scientific journals of communication: Comparing google scholar metrics, web of science and scopus

Comunicar

Volumn 21, Issue 41, 2013, Pages 45-52

  Delgado, Emilio ^a   Repiso, Rafael ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

^b Department of Social Sciences   (Spain)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Citations analysis; Communication; Google Scholar; H index; Ranking; Scopus; Web of Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884229939     PISSN: 11343478     EISSN: 19883293     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3916/C41-2013-04     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ALONSO, S., CABRERIZO, F.J., HERRERA-VIEDMA, E. & HERRERA, F. (2009). H-Index: A Review focused in its Variants, Computation and Standardization for Different Scientific Fields. Journal of Infor - metrics, 3(4), 273-289. (DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001).
2. ARCHAMBAULT, E. & GAGNé, E.V. (2004). The Use of Bibliometrics in Social Sciences and Humanities. Montreal: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC).
3. 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). (DOI: 10.1186/1742- 5581-3-7).
4. BAR-ILAN, J. (2008). Which h-index? A Comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271. (DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y).
5. BAR-ILAN, J. (2010). Citations to the «Introduction to Informetrics» Indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 82(3), 495-506. (DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0185-9).
6. BOLLEN, J., VAN DE SOMPEL, H., HAGBERG, A. & CHUTE, R. (2009). A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures. PloS one, 4(6), e6022. (DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006022).
7. BRAUN, T., GLäNZEL, W. & SCHUBERT, A. (2005). A Hirsch-type Index for Journals. The Sciencist, 19(22), 8-10.
8. CABEZAS-CLAVIJO, á. & DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. (in press). Google Scholar y el índice h en Biomedicina: la popularización de la evaluación bibliométrica. Medicina Intensiva.
9. CABEZAS-CLAVIJO, á. & DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. (2012a). ¿Es posible usar Google Scholar para evaluar a las revistas científicas nacionales en los ámbitos de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas? El caso de las revistas españolas. EC3 Working Paper, (3). (http://eprints. - rclis.org/handle/10760/16888).
10. CABEZAS-CLAVIJO, á. & DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. (2012b). Las revistas españolas de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas en Google Scho - lar Metrics, ¿están todas las que son? EC3 Working Papers, (2). (http://eprints.rclis.org/handle/10760/16892).
11. CHUNG, C., LEE, S., BARNETT, G. A. & KIM, J. (2009). A Compa - rative Network Analysis of KSJCS and ICA in the Era of Hybri - dization. Asian Journal of Communication, 19(2), 170-191. (DOI: 10.1080/01292980902827003).
12. Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Com mu - nication Theory, 9(2), 119-161. (DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999. - tb00166.x).
13. CRAIG, R.T. (2003). Discursive Origins of a Communication Dis -cipline. Annual Convention of the National Comunication Asso - ciations. Miami Beach.
14. DELGADO-LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. & CABEZAS-CLAVIJO, á. (2012a). Goo - gle Scholar Metrics: an unreliable tool for assessing scientific journals. El Profesional de la Información, 21(4), 419-427. (DOI:10. - 3145/epi.2012.jul.15).
15. DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. & CABEZAS-CLAVIJO, á. (2012b). Goo - gle Scholar Metrics revisado: Ahora empieza a ir en serio. EC3 Working Papers, (8). (http://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/22439).
16. DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E. & ROBINSON-GARCÍA, N. (2012). Re - positories in Google Scholar Metrics or what is this Document Type Doing in a Place as Such? Cybermetrics, 16(1), paper 4.
17. DELGADO LóPEZ-CóZAR, E., ORDUÑA-MALEA, E., MARCOS-CARTA - GENA, D., JIMéNEZ-CONTRERAS, E. & RUIZ-PéREZ, R. (2012). Jour - nal Scholar: Una alternativa internacional, gratuita y de libre acceso para medir el impacto de las revistas de Arte, Humanidades y Cien - cias Sociales. EC3 Working Papers, 2012, (5). (http://digibug. ugr. - es/ handle/10481/20375).
18. EGGHE, L. (2010). The Hirsch Index and Related Impact Measures. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 65- 114. (DOI:10.1002/aris.2010.1440440109).
19. FALAGAS, M.E., PITSOUNI, E.I., MALIETZIS, G.A. & PAPPAS, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and Weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338-342. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF).
20. HAKANEN, E.A. & WOLFRAM, D. (1995). Citation Relationships among International Mass Communication Journals. Journal of In - for mation Science, 21(3), 209-215. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/-016555159502100306).
21. HARZING, A. & WAL, R. VAN DER (2009). A Google Scholar H-index for Journals: An Alternative Metric to Measure Journal Impact in Economics and Business. Journal of the American Society for Infor - mation Science and Technology, 60(1), 41-46. (http://dx.doi.org/ 10. - 1002/asi.20953).
22. HODGE, D.R. & LACASSE, J.R. (2011). Ranking Disciplinary Journals with the Google Scholar h-index: A New Tool for Constructing Cases for Tenure, Promotion, and Other Professional Decisions. Journal of Social Work Education, 47(3), 579-596. (http://dx.doi. - org/10.5175/JSWE.2011.201000024).
23. HOUSER, E.T. (2006). The Evaluative Use of Citation Analysis for Communication Journals. Human Communication Research, 22 (4), 563-574. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996. tb0 0 379.x).
24. JACSó, P. (2012). Google Scholar Metrics for Publications: The Software and Content Features of a New Open Access Biblio - metric Service. Online Information Review, 36(4), 604-619. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521211254121).
25. KULKARNI, A.V., AZIZ, B., SHAMS, I. & BUSSE, J.W. (2009). Com - parisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 302(10), 1092- 1096. (DOI:10.1001/jama.2009.1307).
26. LAUF, E. (2005). National Diversity of Major International Journals in the Field of Communication. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 139-151. (DOI:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02663.x).
27. LEVINE, T.R. (2010). Rankings and Trends in Citation Patterns of Communication Journals. Communication Education, 59(1), 41- 51. (DOI:10.1080/03634520903296825).
28. LEYDESDORFF, L. (2009). How Are New Citation based Journal Indicators Adding to the Bibliometric Toolbox? Journal of the Ame - rican Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1327- 1336. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21024).
29. MEHO, L.I. & YANG, K. (2007). Impact of Data Sources on CitationCounts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Infor - mation Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125. (http:// dx. - doi.org/10.1002/asi.20677).
30. PARK, H.W. & LEYDESDORFF, L. (2009). Knowledge Linkage Structures in Communication Studies Using Citation Analysis among Communication Journals. Scientometrics, 81(1), 157-175. (http://-dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2119-y).
31. RICE, R.E., BORGMAN, C.L. & REEVES, B. (1988). Citation Networks of Communication Journals, 1977-1985. Cliques and Positions, Citations Made and Citations Received. Human Communication Research, 15(2), 256-283. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-29 58. - 1988.tb00184.x).
32. SO, C.Y. (1988). Citation Patterns of Core Communication Jour - nals: An Assessment of the Developmental Status of Commu nica - tion. Human Communication Research, 15(2), 236-255. (http:// - dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1988.tb00183.x).
33. STEPHEN, T.D. (2008). Measuring the Reputation and Productivity of Communication Programs. Communication Education, 57(3), 297-311. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520801905600).
34. TORRES-SALINAS, D. & JIMéNEZ-CONTRERAS, E. (2010). In tro duc - ción y estudio comparativo de los nuevos indicadores de citación sobre revistas científicas en Journal Citation Reports y Scopus. El Profesional de la Información, 19(2), 201-208. (http://dx.doi. org/ - 10.3145/epi.2010.mar.12).
35. VANCLAY, J.K. (2008). Ranking Forestry Journals Using the H-in - dex. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 326-334. (http://dx.doi.org/ 10. - 1016/j.joi.2008.07.002).