Using Conventional Bibliographic Databases for Social Science Research: Web of Science and Scopus are not the Only Options

  title={Using Conventional Bibliographic Databases for Social Science Research: Web of Science and Scopus are not the Only Options},
  author={Esther Isabelle Wilder and William H. Walters},
  journal={Scholarly Assessment Reports},
Although large citation databases such as Web of Science and Scopus are widely used in bibliometric research, they have several disadvantages, including limited availability, poor coverage of books and conference proceedings, and inadequate mechanisms for distinguishing among authors. We discuss these issues, then examine the comparative advantages and disadvantages of other bibliographic databases, with emphasis on (a) discipline-centered article databases such as EconLit, MEDLINE, PsycINFO… 
Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases
A novel scientometrics method is introduced and applied to estimate the subject coverages of many of the popular English-focused bibliographic databases in academia and illustrates not only differences in the disciplinary coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, or Web of Science, but also of less frequently analyzed databases.
Scientific evidence on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals
In 2015, the United Nations agreed on 17 Sustainable Development Goals as the central normative framework for sustainable development worldwide. The effectiveness of governing by such broad global


Can we rank scholarly book publishers? A bibliometric experiment with the field of history
A publisher ranking study based on a citation data grant from Elsevier and matching metadata from WorldCat, which creates a unique relational database designed to compare citation counts to books with international library holdings or libcitations for scholarly book publishers.
Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity
Web of Science (WoS) is the world’s oldest, most widely used and authoritative database of research publications and citations and continues to work closely with bibliometric groups around the world to the benefit of both the community and the services the company provides to researchers and analysts.
Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies
The trustworthiness of Scopus has led to its use as bibliometric data source for large-scale analyses in research assessments, research landscape studies, science policy evaluations, and university rankings.
Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic
A large-scale comparison of five multidisciplinary bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic highlights the importance of combining a comprehensive coverage of the scientific literature with a flexible set of filters for making selections of the literature.
Google Scholar as a data source for research assessment
It is concluded 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.
The h‐index, h‐core citation rate and the bibliometric profile of the Scopus database
Examining the bibliometric characteristics of the largest multidisciplinary databases that are the most widely used for measuring research productivity and impact finds preliminary findings about the Scopus database.
Analyzing the citation characteristics of books: edited books, book series and publisher types in the book citation index
A first approach to analyzing the factors that determine the citation characteristics of books is presented, using the Thomson Reuters’ book citation index, a novel multidisciplinary database launched in 2011 which offers bibliometric data on books.
Libcitations: A measure for comparative assessment of book publications in the humanities and social sciences
The libcitation count is presented, a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog, which allows the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and theUniversity of Sydney in Australia to be compared for cultural impact.
Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?
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.