Search results

1 – 1 of 1
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 April 2015

Fee Hilbert, Julia Barth, Julia Gremm, Daniel Gros, Jessica Haiter, Maria Henkel, Wilhelm Reinhardt and Wolfgang G. Stock

The purpose of this paper is to show how the coverage of publications is represented in information services. Academic citation databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to show how the coverage of publications is represented in information services. Academic citation databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) and scientific social media (Mendeley, CiteULike, BibSonomy) were analyzed by applying a new method: the use of personal publication lists of scientists.

Design/methodology/approach

Personal publication lists of scientists of the field of information science were analyzed. All data were taken in collaboration with the scientists in order to guarantee complete publication lists.

Findings

The demonstrated calibration parameter shows the coverage of information services in the field of information science. None of the investigated databases reached a coverage of 100 percent. However Google Scholar covers a greater amount of publications than other academic citation databases and scientific social media.

Research limitations/implications

Results were limited to the publications of scientists working at an information science department from 2003 to 2012 at German-speaking universities.

Practical implications

Scientists of the field of information science are encouraged to review their publication strategy in case of quality and quantity.

Originality/value

The paper confirms the usefulness of personal publication lists as a calibration parameter for measuring coverage of information services.

Details

Online Information Review, vol. 39 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

1 – 1 of 1