作为研究评估的数据来源

Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, E. Orduña-Malea, Alberto Martín-Martín
{"title":"作为研究评估的数据来源","authors":"Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, E. Orduña-Malea, Alberto Martín-Martín","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/pqr53","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The launch of Google Scholar (GS) marked the beginning of a revolution in the scientific information market. This search engine, unlike traditional databases, automatically indexes information from the academic web. Its ease of use, together with its wide coverage and fast indexing speed, have made it the first tool most scientists currently turn to when they need to carry out a literature search. Additionally, the fact that its search results were accompanied from the beginning by citation counts, as well as the later development of secondary products which leverage this citation data (such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations), made many scientists wonder about its potential as a source of data for bibliometric analyses. The goal of this chapter is to lay the foundations for the use of GS as a supplementary source (and in some disciplines, arguably the best alternative) for scientific evaluation. First, we present a general overview of how GS works. Second, we present empirical evidences about its main characteristics (size, coverage, and growth rate). Third, we carry out a systematic analysis of the main limitations this search engine presents as a tool for the evaluation of scientific performance. Lastly, we discuss the main differences between GS and other more traditional bibliographic databases in light of the correlations found between their citation data. We conclude that Google Scholar presents a broader view of the academic world because it has brought to light a great amount of sources that were not previously visible.","PeriodicalId":393794,"journal":{"name":"Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"77","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Google Scholar as a data source for research assessment\",\"authors\":\"Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, E. Orduña-Malea, Alberto Martín-Martín\",\"doi\":\"10.31235/osf.io/pqr53\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The launch of Google Scholar (GS) marked the beginning of a revolution in the scientific information market. This search engine, unlike traditional databases, automatically indexes information from the academic web. Its ease of use, together with its wide coverage and fast indexing speed, have made it the first tool most scientists currently turn to when they need to carry out a literature search. Additionally, the fact that its search results were accompanied from the beginning by citation counts, as well as the later development of secondary products which leverage this citation data (such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations), made many scientists wonder about its potential as a source of data for bibliometric analyses. The goal of this chapter is to lay the foundations for the use of GS as a supplementary source (and in some disciplines, arguably the best alternative) for scientific evaluation. First, we present a general overview of how GS works. Second, we present empirical evidences about its main characteristics (size, coverage, and growth rate). Third, we carry out a systematic analysis of the main limitations this search engine presents as a tool for the evaluation of scientific performance. Lastly, we discuss the main differences between GS and other more traditional bibliographic databases in light of the correlations found between their citation data. We conclude that Google Scholar presents a broader view of the academic world because it has brought to light a great amount of sources that were not previously visible.\",\"PeriodicalId\":393794,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"77\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/pqr53\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/pqr53","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 77

摘要

Google Scholar的推出标志着科学信息市场一场革命的开始。与传统的数据库不同,这个搜索引擎可以自动索引来自学术网络的信息。它的易用性,加上其广泛的覆盖范围和快速的索引速度,使它成为大多数科学家目前需要进行文献搜索时的首选工具。此外,它的搜索结果从一开始就伴随着引文计数,以及后来开发的利用这些引文数据的二级产品(如Google Scholar Metrics和Google Scholar citation),使许多科学家怀疑它作为文献计量分析数据来源的潜力。本章的目标是为使用GS作为科学评估的补充来源(在某些学科中,可以说是最好的替代来源)奠定基础。首先,我们概述一下GS的工作原理。其次,我们对其主要特征(规模、覆盖率和增长率)进行了实证分析。第三,我们对该搜索引擎作为科学绩效评估工具的主要局限性进行了系统的分析。最后,根据引文数据之间的相关性,我们讨论了GS与其他传统书目数据库之间的主要区别。我们得出的结论是,谷歌学术展示了一个更广阔的学术世界,因为它揭示了大量以前不可见的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Google Scholar as a data source for research assessment
The launch of Google Scholar (GS) marked the beginning of a revolution in the scientific information market. This search engine, unlike traditional databases, automatically indexes information from the academic web. Its ease of use, together with its wide coverage and fast indexing speed, have made it the first tool most scientists currently turn to when they need to carry out a literature search. Additionally, the fact that its search results were accompanied from the beginning by citation counts, as well as the later development of secondary products which leverage this citation data (such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations), made many scientists wonder about its potential as a source of data for bibliometric analyses. The goal of this chapter is to lay the foundations for the use of GS as a supplementary source (and in some disciplines, arguably the best alternative) for scientific evaluation. First, we present a general overview of how GS works. Second, we present empirical evidences about its main characteristics (size, coverage, and growth rate). Third, we carry out a systematic analysis of the main limitations this search engine presents as a tool for the evaluation of scientific performance. Lastly, we discuss the main differences between GS and other more traditional bibliographic databases in light of the correlations found between their citation data. We conclude that Google Scholar presents a broader view of the academic world because it has brought to light a great amount of sources that were not previously visible.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Readership Data and Research Impact Reviewing, indicating, and counting books for modern research evaluation systems Scholarly Twitter metrics Field normalization of scientometric indicators The Journal Impact Factor: A brief history, critique, and discussion of adverse effects
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1