International Journal of Information Studies & Libraries

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Measuring the Coverage of Library and Information Science (LIS) Academia in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic: A Scientometric Comparison


Affiliations
1 Research Scholar, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, Mizoram, India
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, Mizoram, India
3 Professor, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The purpose of study is to measure the coverage of LIS academia in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic using scientometric indicators. The study is based on simple search queries in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic for each LIS faculty whose information is available on their university website. Duplicate names for LIS faculties have been filtered by adding the extra search string with their names and non-LIS publications have been removed from the study. The study found more coverage for Google Scholar than Microsoft Academic. Google Scholar based “document types” are quite unclear and considered as its’ limitations. The study is limited to 26 LIS faculties from five Central Universities of North-East India. The results are limited due to use of simple search in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic rather than profile search. The study provides insight for the individual researcher and LIS departments to focus on indexing of their research in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic.

Keywords

Research Performance, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Research Coverage, LIS Research.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • Adriaanse, L. S., & Rensleigh, C. (2013). Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison. Electronic Library, 31(6), 727-744. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2011-0174

  • Baldock, C., Ma, R., & Orton, C. G. (2009). The h index is the best measure of a scientist’s research productivity: Point/Counterpoint. Medical Physics, 36(4), 1043-1045. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3089421

  • Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Terliesner, J. (2012). Beyond citations: Scholars’ visibility on the social web (p. 14). Presented at the 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved October 10, 2018 from https://arxiv.org/abs/1205.5611

  • Barreto, M. L., Aragao, E., Sousa, L. E. P. F., Santana, T. M., Barata, R. B., Barreto, M. L., … Barata, R. B. (2013). Differences between h-index measures from different bibliographic sources and search engines. Revista de Saúde Pública, 47(2), 231-238. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102013000100008

  • Butler, D. (2011). Computing giants launch free science metrics. Nature, 476(7358), 18-18. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/476018a

  • Carlson, S. (2006, April). Challenging Google, Microsoft unveils a search tool for scholarly articles. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(33). Retrieved October 10, 2018 from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Challenging-Google-Microsoft/17846

  • 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. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF

  • Franceschet, M. (2010). A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 83(1), 243-258. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0021-2

  • Harzing, A. W. (2016a). Microsoft Academic versus Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: Anne-Wil Harzing’s case. Retrieved April 28, 2018 from http://googlescholardigest.blogspot.com/2016/06/microsoft-academic-versus-google.html

  • Harzing, A. W. (2016b). Microsoft Academic (Search): A Phoenix arisen from the ashes?. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1637-1647. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2026-y

  • Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2017). Microsoft Academic is one year old: The phoenix is ready to leave the nest. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1887-1894. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2454-3

  • Huang, M., & Chi, P. (2010). A comparative analysis of the application of h-index, g-index, and a-index in institutional-level research evaluation. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 8(2), 1-10.

  • Hug, S. E., & Brändle. (2017, June 19). Microsoft Academic is on the verge of becoming a bibliometric superpower. Retrieved May 1, 2018 from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2017/06/19/microsoft-academic-is-on-the-verge-of-becoming-a-bibliometric-superpower/

  • Hug, S. E., Ochsner, M., & Brändle, M. P. (2017). Citation analysis with Microsoft Academic. Scientometrics, 111(1), 371-378. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2247-8

  • Jacsó, P. (2011). The pros and cons of Microsoft Academic search from a bibliometric perspective. Online Information Review, 35(6), 983-997. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111210788

  • Levine-Clark, M., & Gil, E. L. (2008). A comparative citation analysis of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 14(1), 32-46. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/08963560802176348

  • Mayr, P., & Walter, A.-K. (2007). An exploratory study of Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 31(6), 814-830. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520710841784

  • Orduña-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., Ayllon, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). The silent fading of an academic search engine: The case of Microsoft academic search. Online Information Review, 38(7), 936-953. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-07-2014-0169

  • Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Microsoft Academic search and Google Scholar Citations: Comparative analysis of author profiles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1149-1156. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23036

  • Schroeder, R. (2007). Pointing users toward citation searching: Using Google Scholar and Web of Science. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 7(2), 243-248. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2007.0022

  • Thelwall, M. (2018). Does Microsoft Academic find early citations?. Scientometrics, 114(1), 325-334. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2558-9


Abstract Views: 269

PDF Views: 1




  • Measuring the Coverage of Library and Information Science (LIS) Academia in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic: A Scientometric Comparison

Abstract Views: 269  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Sanjay Kumar Maurya
Research Scholar, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, Mizoram, India
Akhandanand Shukla
Assistant Professor, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, Mizoram, India
R. K. Ngurtinkhuma
Professor, Department of Library & Information Science, Mizoram University, Aizawl, India

Abstract


The purpose of study is to measure the coverage of LIS academia in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic using scientometric indicators. The study is based on simple search queries in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic for each LIS faculty whose information is available on their university website. Duplicate names for LIS faculties have been filtered by adding the extra search string with their names and non-LIS publications have been removed from the study. The study found more coverage for Google Scholar than Microsoft Academic. Google Scholar based “document types” are quite unclear and considered as its’ limitations. The study is limited to 26 LIS faculties from five Central Universities of North-East India. The results are limited due to use of simple search in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic rather than profile search. The study provides insight for the individual researcher and LIS departments to focus on indexing of their research in Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic.

Keywords


Research Performance, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Research Coverage, LIS Research.

References