Trzech uczonych, trzy bazy, jeden bibliotekarz. O pożytkach i metodzie uczelnianej analizy cytowań.

Celoch, Hanna . Trzech uczonych, trzy bazy, jeden bibliotekarz. O pożytkach i metodzie uczelnianej analizy cytowań., 2008 In: Wymiana informacji i rozwój profesjonalnych usług informacyjnych w edukacji, nauce i kulturze na rzecz społeczeństwa opartego na wiedzy. Polskie Towarzystwo Informacji Naukowej, pp. 325-331. [Book chapter]

Preview

PDF 5-Celoch-1.pdf Download (209kB) | Preview

English abstract

Three scholars, three databases, one librarian. On the uses and method of citation analysis for a university. For many years Science Citations Index, published by the Institute of Scientific Information in Philadelphia served for analysis of scientific output by the way of citations count and tracking. In Lublin University of Technology we started doing so in 1995. It was the only citations database available at that time, and although this school’s authors were hardly present in it, and the searching functionalities were far from perfect, we continued the screening ever since. In the year 2004 SCOPUS database and Google Scholar search engine showed up, both capable to compete with SCI. This paper is an attempt to compare these three tools. Three authors were selected for the test: two chemists (electrochemistry and environment engineering) and one physicist. The selection was based mostly on the name (unrepeated within the discipline and without Polish diacritics) and the number of publications – between 50 and 100, so that the material for comparison is not too large but large enough to produce a different picture for each author. All three authors have been contributing to scientific journals for more than 15 years, and the analysis covers the period since 1996 till now.

Item type:	Book chapter
Keywords:	citation analysis, compare three tools, Scopus, Science Citation Index, Google Scholar, analiza cytowań, porównanie narzędzi pomiaru cytowań
Subjects:	B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user:	Hanna Celoch
Date deposited:	08 Aug 2010
Last modified:	02 Oct 2014 12:16
URI:	http://hdl.handle.net/10760/14182

References

[1] Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K., Glover J., Wang L.: Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science [dokument elektroniczny]. Tryb dostępu: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1533854&blobtype=pdf [dostęp 10 września 2007].

[2] Jacso P.: As we may search – Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation–based and citation–enhanced databases. “Current Science” 2005 Vol. 89 No. 9, p. 1537–1547.

[3] Meho Lokman I., Yang Kiduk: Impact of Data Sources on Citation Counts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar [dokument elektroniczny]. Tryb dostępu: http://www.slis.indiana.edu/faculty/meho/meho–yang–03.pdf [dostęp 10 września 2007].

[4] Publish or Perish [dokument elektroniczny]. Tryb dostępu: http://www.harzing.com [dostęp 9 września 2007].

[5] Racki G.: Najbardziej znane publikacje Przeglądu Geologicznego z lat 1996–2003 (na podstawie bazy Scopus™). „Przegląd Geologiczny” 2005 vol. 53 nr 10/1, s. 839–843.

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item