Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison

@article{Harzing2015GoogleSS,
  title={Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison},
  author={Anne-Wil Harzing and Satu Alakangas},
  journal={Scientometrics},
  year={2015},
  volume={106},
  pages={787-804}
}
Abstract This article aims to provide a systematic and comprehensive comparison of the coverage of the three major bibliometric databases: Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science. Based on a sample of 146 senior academics in five broad disciplinary areas, we therefore provide both a longitudinal and a cross-disciplinary comparison of the three databases. Our longitudinal comparison of eight data points between 2013 and 2015 shows a consistent and reasonably stable quarterly growth for… 
A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers
TLDR
It is revealed that although both Web of Science and Scopus are increasingly used in academic papers, Scopus as a new-comer is really challenging the dominating role of WoS.
Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?
TLDR
Overall, this first small-scale study suggests that, when compared to Scopus and the Web of Science, Crossref and Dimensions have a similar or better coverage for both publications and citations, but a substantively lower coverage than Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic.
A Criteria-based Assessment of the Coverage of Scopus and Web of Science
TLDR
The relative coverages of Scopus and Web of Science are compared with regard to publication type, field of research and language and the results show that Scopus covers 72 percent of the total Norwegian scientific and scholarly publication output in 2015 and 2016.
Microsoft Academic: is the phoenix getting wings?
TLDR
It is concluded that the Microsoft Academic Phoenix is undeniably growing wings; it might be ready to fly off and start its adult life in the field of research evaluation soon.
Erratum to: Normalizing Google Scholar data for use in research evaluation
TLDR
Results show that GS normalization is possible although at the moment it requires extensive manual involvement in generating and validating the data and a comparison of the normalized results for journal papers with WoS data shows a high degree of convergent validity.
Normalizing Google Scholar data for use in research evaluation
TLDR
Results show that GS normalization is possible although at the moment it requires extensive manual involvement in generating and validating the data and a comparison of the normalized results for journal papers with WoS data shows a high degree of convergent validity.
Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings
TLDR
Detailed bibliographic comparisons between three key databases are performed and it is suggested that robust evaluation measures need to consider the effect of choice of data sources and recommend an approach where data from multiple sources is integrated to provide a more robust dataset.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 43 REFERENCES
Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison
TLDR
It became evident during the verification process that the citation resources retrieved varied results, and the total citation counts indicated that ISI Web of Science (WOS) retrieved the same results as Google Scholar.
A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners
TLDR
This article assesses to what extent Google Scholar can be used as an alternative source of citation data, and argues that Google Scholar might provide a less biased comparison across disciplines than the Web of Science.
A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university
TLDR
A detailed paper by paper study is presented of the coverage achieved by ISI Web of Science and by Scopus of the output of a typical university and the general conclusion is that about 2/3 of the documents referenced in any of the two databases may be found in both databases.
The impact of scientific journals of communication: Comparing Google Scholar Metrics, Web of Science and Scopus
TLDR
It is concluded that Google Scholar Metrics is a tool capable of identifying the main journals in Communication Studies offering results as reliable and valid as the ones Web of Science and Scopus show.
A Comparative Study of Journals Quality based on Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A Case Study with IJP&PT
The purpose of this article is to analyze the evolution of the International Journal of Psychology & Psychological Therapy (IJP&PT) throughout its first decade of publication (from years 2001 to
Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
TLDR
The data indicate that the question of which tool provides the most complete set of citing literature may depend on the subject and publication year of a given article, and that any one of these three resources as the answer to all citation tracking needs is not identified.
Ranking of departments and researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus Scopus
TLDR
It was concluded that the difference in the number of citations found did not correspond to the difference of coverage of WoS and Scopus, and it was found that both databases generate similar results.
Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar
TLDR
This paper examined these three citation databases through the citations of the book “Introduction to informetrics” by Leo Egghe and Ronald Rousseau, finding that Google Scholar is not very “user-friendly” as a bibliometric data collection tool at this point in time.
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar
TLDR
Results show that Scopus significantly alters the relative ranking of those scholars that appear in the middle of the rankings and that GS stands out in its coverage of conference proceedings as well as international, non-English language journals.
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar
TLDR
Results show that Scopus significantly alters the relative ranking of those scholars that appear in the middle of the rankings and that GS stands out in its coverage of conference proceedings as well as international, non-English language journals.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...