Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 823-834

  Halevi, Gali ^a   Moed, Henk ^b   Bar Ilan, Judit ^c  

^a MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^c BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS;

GOOGLE SCHOLAR; LITERATURE RETRIEVAL; SCIENTIFIC EVALUATIONS; SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; WEB OF SCIENCE;

QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 85021624027     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.005     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. Adriaanse, L.S., Rensleigh, C., Comparing web of science, Scopus and Google Scholar from an environmental sciences perspective. South African Journal of Libraries & Information Science, 77(2), 2011.
2. Adriaanse, L.S., Rensleigh, C., Web of science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison. The Electronic Library 31:6 (2013), 727–744.
3. Amara, N., Landry, R., Counting citations in the field of business and management: Why use Google Scholar rather than the Web of Science. Scientometrics 93:3 (2012), 553–581.
4. Arlitsch, K., O'Brien, P.S., Invisible institutional repositories: Addressing the low indexing ratios of IRs in Google Scholar. Library Hi Tech 30:1 (2012), 60–81.
5. Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., Wang, L., Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and web of science. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3(1), 2006, 7.
6. Bar-Ilan, J., Which h-index?—A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 74:2 (2008), 257–271.
7. Bar-Ilan, J., Citations to the Introduction to informetrics indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 82:3 (2010), 495–506.
8. Bauer, K., Bakkalbasi, N., An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment. 2005, D-Lib Magazine Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/400/article/322773.
9. Beckmann, M., Wehrden, H., Where you search is what you get: Literature mining–Google Scholar versus Web of Science using a data set from a literature search in vegetation science. Journal of Vegetation Science 23:6 (2012), 1197–1199.
10. Beel, J., Gipp, B., On the robustness of Google Scholar against spam. Proceedings of the 21 st ACM conference on hypertext and hypermedia, ACM, 2010, 297–298 Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1810683.
11. Boeker, M., Vach, W., Motschall, E., Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: Good relative recall and precision are not enough. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 2013, 1.
12. Bohannon, J., Google Scholar wins raves-but can it be trusted. Science, 343(6166), 2014, 14.
13. Bornmann, L., Marx, W., Schier, H., Rahm, E., Thor, A., Daniel, H.-D., Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry—Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics 3:1 (2009), 27–35.
14. Bornmann, L., Thor, A., Marx, W., Schier, H., The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences: An exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 10.1002/asi.23627 n/a–n/a.
15. Bramer, W.M., Giustini, D., Kramer, B.M., Anderson, P.F., The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: A review of searches used in systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 2(1), 2013, 1.
16. Bramer, W.M., Giustini, D., Kramer, B.M.R., Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: A prospective study. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 2016, 10.1186/s13643-016-0215-7.
17. Chan, J.Y., Chan, K.C., Tong, J.Y., Zhang, F., Using Google Scholar citations to rank accounting programs: A global perspective. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting 47:1 (2016), 29–55, 10.1007/s11156-014-0493-x.
18. Cusker, J., Elsevier Compendex and Google Scholar: a quantitative comparison of two resources for engineering research and an update to prior comparisons. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 39:3 (2013), 241–243.
19. De Groote, S.L., Raszewski, R., Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in nursing. Nursing Outlook 60:6 (2012), 391–400.
20. DeGraff, J.V., DeGraff, N., Romesburg, H.C., Literature searches with Google Scholar: Knowing what you are and are not getting. GSA Today 23:10 (2013), 44–45.
21. Delgado López-Cózar, E., Robinson-García, N., Repositories in Google Scholar Metrics or what is this document type doing in a place as such?. 2012 Retrieved from http://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/22019.
22. Delgado-López-Cózar, E., Cabezas-Clavijo, Ranking journals: Could Google scholar metrics be an alternative to journal citation reports and Scimago journal rank?. Learned Publishing 26:2 (2013), 101–113.
23. Ebrahim, N.A., Salehi, H., Embi, M.A., Danaee, M., Mohammadjafari, M., Zavvari, A., Shahbazi-Moghadam, M., Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science citations: Case of Malaysian engineering highly cited papers. Modern Applied Science, 8(5), 2014, 63.
24. Etxebarria, G., Gomez-Uranga, M., Use of Scopus and Google Scholar to measure social sciences production in four major Spanish universities. Scientometrics 82:2 (2010), 333–349.
25. Falagas, M.E., Pitsouni, E.I., Malietzis, G.A., Pappas, G., Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal 22:2 (2008), 338–342.
26. Franceschet, M., A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 83:1 (2010), 243–258.
27. García-Pérez, M.A., Accuracy and completeness of publication and citation records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: A case study for the computation of h indices in Psychology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61:10 (2010), 2070–2085.
28. Gardner, S., Eng, S., Gaga over Google? Scholar in the social sciences. Library Hi Tech News 22:8 (2005), 42–45.
29. Giustini, D., Boulos, M.N.K., Google Scholar is not enough to be used alone for systematic reviews. Online Journal of Public Health Informatics, 2013 Retrieved from http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/ojphi/article/view/4623.
30. Harzing, A.-W., Alakangas, S., Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics 106:2 (2016), 787–804.
31. Harzing, A.-W., Van Der Wal, R., A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60:1 (2009), 41–46.
32. Harzing, A.-W., A longitudinal study of Google Scholar coverage between 2012 and 2013. Scientometrics 98:1 (2014), 565–575.
33. Hodge, D.R., Lacasse, J.R., 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 (2011), 579–596.
34. Jacobs, J.A., Journal rankings in sociology: Using the H index with google scholar. The American Sociologist, 2011, 1–33.
35. Jacobs, J.A., Journal rankings in sociology: Using the H index with google scholar. American Sociologist 47:2–3 (2016), 192–224, 10.1007/s12108-015-9292-7.
36. Jacsó, P., Google Scholar duped and deduped-the aura of robometrics. Online Information Review 35:1 (2011), 154–160.
37. Jacsó, P., Google Scholar Author Citation Tracker: Is it too little, too late?. Online Information Review 36:1 (2012), 126–141.
38. Jacso, P., 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-Bangalore, 89(9), 2005, 1537.
39. Jamali, H.R., Nabavi, M., Open access and sources of full-text articles in Google Scholar in different subject fields. Scientometrics 105:3 (2015), 1635–1651.
40. Khabsa, M., Giles, C.L., The number of scholarly documents on the public web. PLoS One, 9(5), 2014, e93949, 10.1371/journal.pone.0093949.
41. Kirkwood, H.P., Kirkwood, M.C., Researching the life sciences: BIOSIS previews and google scholar. Online 35:3 (2011), 24–28.
42. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., 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 (2007), 1055–1065.
43. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics 74:2 (2008), 273–294.
44. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., Rezaie, S., Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62:11 (2011), 2147–2164.
45. Kulkarni, A.V., Aziz, B., Shams, I., Busse, J.W., Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 302:10 (2009), 1092–1096.
46. Levay, P., Ainsworth, N., Kettle, R., Morgan, A., Identifying evidence for public health guidance: A comparison of citation searching with Web of Science and Google Scholar. Research Synthesis Methods 7:1 (2016), 34–45, 10.1002/jrsm.1158.
47. Levine-Clark, M., Gil, E.L., A comparative citation analysis of web of science, scopus, and google scholar. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship 14:1 (2008), 32–46.
48. Levine-Clark, M., Kraus, J., Finding chemistry information using google scholar: A comparison with chemical abstracts service. Science & Technology Libraries 27:4 (2007), 3–17.
49. Lewandowski, D., Google Scholar as a tool for discovering journal articles in library and information science. Online Information Review 34:2 (2010), 250–262.
50. Lopez-Cozar, E.D., Robinson-Garcia, N., Torres-Salinas, D., Manipulating google scholar citations and google scholar metrics: Simple, easy and tempting. 2012, arXiv Preprint arXiv:1212.0638 Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0638.
51. Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J.M., López-Cózar, E.D., Does Google Scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950–2013)?. 2014, arXiv:1410.8464 [Cs] [Retrieved from] http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.8464.
52. Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J.M., López-Cózar, E.D., The counting house: Measuring those who count. Presence of bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, webometrics and altmetrics in the google scholar citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, mendeley & twitter. 2016, arXiv Preprint arXiv:1602.02412 Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.02412.
53. Mastrangelo, G., Fadda, E., Rossi, C.R., Zamprogno, E., Buja, A., Cegolon, L., Literature search on risk factors for sarcoma: PubMed and Google Scholar may be complementary sources. BMC Research Notes, 3(1), 2010, 131.
54. Mayr, P., Walter, A.-K., Studying journal coverage in google scholar. Journal of Library Administration 47:1–2 (2008), 81–99.
55. Meho, L.I., Yang, K., 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 (2007), 2105–2125.
56. Meier, J.J., Conkling, T.W., Google Scholar's coverage of the engineering literature: An empirical study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 34:3 (2008), 196–201.
57. Mikki, S., Comparing google scholar and ISI web of science for earth sciences. Scientometrics 82:2 (2010), 321–331.
58. Minasny, B., Hartemink, A.E., McBratney, A., Jang, H.-J., Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. PeerJ, 1, 2013, e183.
59. Mingers, J., Lipitakis, E.A., Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics 85:2 (2010), 613–625.
60. Moed, H.F., Bar-Ilan, J., Halevi, G., A new methodology for comparing Google Scholar and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics 10:2 (2016), 533–551, 10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.017.
61. Neuhaus, C., Neuhaus, E., Asher, A., Wrede, C., The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: An empirical study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy 6:2 (2006), 127–141.
62. Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. Journal of Informetrics 1:2 (2007), 161–169.
63. Nourbakhsh, E., Nugent, R., Wang, H., Cevik, C., Nugent, K., Medical literature searches: A comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar. Health Information & Libraries Journal 29:3 (2012), 214–222.
64. Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J.M., Martín-Martín, A., López-Cózar, E.D., About the size of Google Scholar: Playing the numbers. 2014, arXiv Preprint arXiv:1407.6239 Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.6239.
65. Ortega, J.L., Aguillo, I.F., Microsoft academic search and Google scholar citations: Comparative analysis of author profiles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65:6 (2014), 1149–1156.
66. Shariff, S.Z., Bejaimal, S.A., Sontrop, J.M., Iansavichus, A.V., Haynes, R.B., Weir, M.A., Garg, A.X., Retrieving clinical evidence: A comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar for quick clinical searches. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(8), 2013, e164.
67. Thor, A., Bornmann, L., The calculation of the single publication h index and related performance measures: A web application based on Google Scholar data. Online Information Review 35:2 (2011), 291–300.
68. Tober, M., PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus or Google Scholar–Which is the best search engine for an effective literature research in laser medicine?. Medical Laser Application 26:3 (2011), 139–144.
69. Trapp, J., Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation rates: a case study of medical physics and biomedical engineering: what gets cited and what doesn't?. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 2016, 1–7.
70. van Aalst, J., Using Google Scholar to estimate the impact of journal articles in education. Educational Researcher 39:5 (2010), 387–400.
71. Van Noorden, R., Google Scholar pioneer on search engine's future. Nature, 2014 Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/15400/article/13421985.
72. Wakimoto, D.K., Google scholar retrieves twice as many relevant citations as PubMed and provides greater full-text access for quick, clinical nephrology searches. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 9:1 (2014), 36–38.
73. Walters, W.H., Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Information Processing & Management 43:4 (2007), 1121–1132.
74. Wildgaard, L., A comparison of 17 author-level bibliometric indicators for researchers in astronomy, environmental science, philosophy and public health in web of science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 104:3 (2015), 873–906.
75. Zarifmahmoudi, L., Sadeghi, R., Comparison of ISI web of knowledge, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar h-indices of Iranian nuclear medicine scientists. Iranian Journal of Nuclear Medicine 20:1 (2012), 1–4.