Web of Science、Scopus和Dimensions的学术论文检索:检索质量的比较分析

IF 1.8 4区 管理学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Journal of Information Science Pub Date : 2023-08-21 DOI:10.1177/01655515231191351
Prashasti Singh, V. K. Singh, Rajesh Piryani
{"title":"Web of Science、Scopus和Dimensions的学术论文检索:检索质量的比较分析","authors":"Prashasti Singh, V. K. Singh, Rajesh Piryani","doi":"10.1177/01655515231191351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholarly databases are now being increasingly used for search and retrieval of research articles in different subject areas. Several previous studies have shown that different databases vary in their coverage of publication sources, and therefore, one may expect that for a given query, they may retrieve different results. However, how do these databases compare in terms of relevance of the retrieved results is relatively unexplored. This study, therefore, attempts to bridge this research gap by carrying out a systematic study of retrieval relevance of the three scholarly databases – Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. Five selected queries are used for this purpose. The retrieved results from the three databases for the given queries are first analysed in terms of volume of retrieved records, language of retrieved records, etc. Thereafter, a user-based annotation scheme is used to assess and compare the relevance of retrieved results. The standard measure of normalised discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) and Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SRCC) is computed for the purpose. Results indicate that although the number of retrieved results for the same query differs significantly in the three databases, the databases differ only marginally in retrieval relevance, with Web of Science having a slight edge over other two.","PeriodicalId":54796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scholarly article retrieval from Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis of retrieval quality\",\"authors\":\"Prashasti Singh, V. K. Singh, Rajesh Piryani\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01655515231191351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholarly databases are now being increasingly used for search and retrieval of research articles in different subject areas. Several previous studies have shown that different databases vary in their coverage of publication sources, and therefore, one may expect that for a given query, they may retrieve different results. However, how do these databases compare in terms of relevance of the retrieved results is relatively unexplored. This study, therefore, attempts to bridge this research gap by carrying out a systematic study of retrieval relevance of the three scholarly databases – Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. Five selected queries are used for this purpose. The retrieved results from the three databases for the given queries are first analysed in terms of volume of retrieved records, language of retrieved records, etc. Thereafter, a user-based annotation scheme is used to assess and compare the relevance of retrieved results. The standard measure of normalised discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) and Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SRCC) is computed for the purpose. Results indicate that although the number of retrieved results for the same query differs significantly in the three databases, the databases differ only marginally in retrieval relevance, with Web of Science having a slight edge over other two.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Information Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Information Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231191351\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Science","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231191351","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学术数据库现在越来越多地用于搜索和检索不同学科领域的研究论文。先前的一些研究表明,不同的数据库对出版物来源的覆盖范围各不相同,因此,对于给定的查询,它们可能会检索到不同的结果。然而,这些数据库在检索结果的相关性方面是如何比较的,这是相对未知的。因此,本研究试图通过对Web of Science、Scopus和Dimensions三个学术数据库的检索相关性进行系统研究来弥补这一研究缺口。为此选择了5个查询。首先根据检索记录的数量、检索记录的语言等对三个数据库中给定查询的检索结果进行分析。然后,使用基于用户的注释方案来评估和比较检索结果的相关性。为此,计算了标准化贴现累积增益(NDCG)和斯皮尔曼等级相关系数(SRCC)的标准度量。结果表明,虽然同一查询的检索结果数量在三个数据库中差异很大,但检索相关性差异很小,其中Web of Science比其他两个数据库稍微有优势。
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
Scholarly article retrieval from Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis of retrieval quality
Scholarly databases are now being increasingly used for search and retrieval of research articles in different subject areas. Several previous studies have shown that different databases vary in their coverage of publication sources, and therefore, one may expect that for a given query, they may retrieve different results. However, how do these databases compare in terms of relevance of the retrieved results is relatively unexplored. This study, therefore, attempts to bridge this research gap by carrying out a systematic study of retrieval relevance of the three scholarly databases – Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. Five selected queries are used for this purpose. The retrieved results from the three databases for the given queries are first analysed in terms of volume of retrieved records, language of retrieved records, etc. Thereafter, a user-based annotation scheme is used to assess and compare the relevance of retrieved results. The standard measure of normalised discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) and Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SRCC) is computed for the purpose. Results indicate that although the number of retrieved results for the same query differs significantly in the three databases, the databases differ only marginally in retrieval relevance, with Web of Science having a slight edge over other two.
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
Journal of Information Science
Journal of Information Science 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
121
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Information Science is a peer-reviewed international journal of high repute covering topics of interest to all those researching and working in the sciences of information and knowledge management. The Editors welcome material on any aspect of information science theory, policy, application or practice that will advance thinking in the field.
期刊最新文献
Government chatbot: Empowering smart conversations with enhanced contextual understanding and reasoning Knowing within multispecies families: An information experience study How are global university rankings adjusted for erroneous science, fraud and misconduct? Posterior reduction or adjustment in rankings in response to retractions and invalidation of scientific findings Predicting the technological impact of papers: Exploring optimal models and most important features Cross-domain corpus selection for cold-start context
×
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