Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract:

Assessing the quality of the knowledge produced by business and management academics is increasingly being metricated. Moreover, emphasis is being placed on the impact of the research rather than simply where it is published. The main metric for impact is the number of citations a paper receives. Traditionally this data has come from the ISI Web of Science but research has shown that this has poor coverage in the social sciences. A newer and different source for citations is Google Scholar. In this paper we compare the two on a dataset of over 4,600 publications from three UK Business Schools. The results show that Web of Science is indeed poor in the area of management and that Google Scholar, whilst somewhat unreliable, has a much better coverage. The conclusion is that Web of Science should not be used for measuring research impact in management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006). Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3(7). doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7.

  • Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index?—A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evidence Ltd. (2004). Bibliometric profiles for selected units of assessment. Leeds: Evidence Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A.-W., & Van der Wal, R. (2009). A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business? Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (2008a). Counting what is measured or measuring what counts (no. 2008/14). HEFCE. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/consult/outcomes/ref.asp.

  • HEFCE. (2008b). Survey of institutions interested in participating in the pilot of the bibliometrics indicator. HEFCE. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/consult/outcomes/ref.asp.

  • Hirsch, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacso, P. (2005). 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, 89(9), 1537–1547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, R., Dai, Q., Ni, C., & Li, X. (2009). An author co-citation analysis of information science in China with Chinese Google Scholar search engine, 2004–2006. Scientometrics, 81(1), 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahdi, S., D’Este, P., & Neely, A. (2008). Citation counts: Are they good predictors of RAE scores? London: AIM Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meho, L., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105–2125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J. (2008). Measuring the research contribution of management academics using the Hirsch-index. Journal of Operational Research Society, 60(8), 1143–1153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Burrell, Q. (2006). Modelling citation behavior in management science journals. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1451–1464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Harzing, A.-W. (2007). Ranking journals in business and management: A statistical analysis of the Harzing dataset. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(4), 303–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Xu, F. (2010). The drivers of citations in management science journals. European Journal of Operational Research, 205, 422–430.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H., & Visser, M. (2008). Appraisal of citation data sources. Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H., Visser, M., & Buter, R. (2008). Development of bibliometric indicators of research quality. Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University: Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Bibliometric databases—scoping project. Louborough: Department of Information Science, Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenopir, C. (2004). Online scholarly journals: How many? Library Journal, 129(2), 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenopir, C. (2005). Google in the academic library. Library Journal, 130(2), 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Raan, A. (2003). The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments. Technology Assessment Theory and Practice, 1(12), 20–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, W. (2007). Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Information Processing and Management, 43, 1121–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kent Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury, CT7 2PE, UK

    John Mingers & Evangelia A. E. C. G. Lipitakis

Authors
  1. John Mingers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Evangelia A. E. C. G. Lipitakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Mingers.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mingers, J., Lipitakis, E.A.E.C.G. Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics 85, 613–625 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation