Analysis of Webometric Term in Scopus Database during 2000-2019

Publications, 2021

Nowadays, the importance of bibliographic databases (DBs) has increased enormously, as they are the main providers of publication metadata and bibliometric indicators universally used both for research assessment practices and for performing daily tasks. Because the reliability of these tasks firstly depends on the data source, all users of the DBs should be able to choose the most suitable one. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus are the two main bibliographic DBs. The comprehensive evaluation of the DBs’ coverage is practically impossible without extensive bibliometric analyses or literature reviews, but most DBs users do not have bibliometric competence and/or are not willing to invest additional time for such evaluations. Apart from that, the convenience of the DB’s interface, performance, provided impact indicators and additional tools may also influence the users’ choice. The main goal of this work is to provide all of the potential users with an all-inclusive description of the two main bibliographic DBs by gathering the findings that are presented in the most recent literature and information provided by the owners of the DBs at one place. This overview should aid all stakeholders employing publication and citation data in selecting the most suitable DB.

Asian Social Science , 2013

Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics.

Scientometrics, 2009

For many years, the ISI Web of Knowledge from Thomson Reuters was the sole publication and citation database covering all areas of science thus becoming an invaluable tool in bibliometric analysis. In 2004, Elsevier introduced Scopus and this is rapidly becoming a good alternative. Several attempts have been made at comparing these two instruments from the point of view of journal coverage for research or for bibliometric assessment of research output. This paper attempts to answer the question that all researchers ask, i.e., what is to be gained by searching both databases? Or, if you are forced to opt for one of them, which should you prefer? To answer this question, 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. After considering the set of Portuguese universities, the detailed analysis is made for two of them for 2006, the two being chosen for their comprehensiveness typical of most European universities. The general conclusion is that about 2/3 of the documents referenced in any of the two databases may be found in both databases while a fringe of 1/3 are only referenced in one or the other. The citation impact of the documents in the core present in both databases is higher, but the impact of the fringe that are present only in one of the databases should not be disregarded as some high impact documents may be found among them.

Quarterly Journal of the National Library of Iran [online], 2005

The study discussed in this article attempts to trace the research trends in information and communication technology (ICT) in top 10 countries during 1999-2018, as reflected by scholarly publications index in the Scopus database. During the mentioned time period, total 18,382 research papers were published. Of these, maximum 1622 (8.82%) records were published in 2017. The annual growth (-11.07 to 51.30) and the compound annual growth (-0.01 to 0.23) have shown a fluctuating trend. However, a considerable number of records (7345) were published in the field of computer science while 52.35% of the records (9623) were journal article-type publications. 'Information and communication technology' was the most significant keyword used in 4997 records while the average (145.3) publications were contributed by top 10 organizations in which Japan National Institute of Information and Communications Technology was the most productive organization with 256 records. The maximum contributing country was the United States, standing for 22% of the total publications produced. Toyoshima, M. is the most prolific author with 53 publications on a particular topic, that is, ICT. The overall relative growth has shown a decreasing trend (0.92 to 0.09) while during the period of study, the doubling time has shown an increasing trend (0.75 to 7.54). Out of the total 18,382 records, total 209,919 citations were recorded in which the maximum citations (20,548) were found in 2010. Out of the total 55,913 research papers, maximum (5058) records were contributed by two authors while the least number of publications (2186) came from four authors. The mean value of the degree of collaborations was 0.92 and the overall degree of collaboration has exhibited an increasing trend during the period of study. The average author's collaboration coefficient and modified collaboration coefficient was recorded to be 0.69 while collaborative index was recorded at 4.21. However, Lotka's law of authors' productivity shows, the authors observed are somehow unlike from the numbers of authors expected during the period of study.

Journal of Library and Information Communication Technology, 2022

The present study deals about the scientometric analysis of4347papers of Scientometrics Journal during the year 2000 to 2019. The study focuses on various aspects of Scientometrics journal such as its document type wise, published year-wise distribution of papers, contributors and their productivity, geographical distribution, citation pattern. The study shows that out of4347papers the highest number 3858 (88.75%) of articles in Items -wise and the lowest number 1 (0.02%) of Retracted in Item wise were published in the study period. The highest number 397 (9.13%) of papers -were published in 2018 and the lowest number 82 (1.89%) of research articles published in the year 2000. The maximum number of citations were 8828 (9.43%) in the year 2010 whereas, the minimum number of citations -were 797 (0.85%) in the year 2019. The majority of 11.74% contributions from China -which is the first position, followed by 10.57% -were contributed by United States is the second rank. All the studies will be helpful for its further development.

Journal of Information Science, 2008

Bibliometrics has changed out of all recognition since 1958; becoming established as a field, being taught widely in library and information science schools, and being at the core of a number of science evaluation research groups around the world. This was all made possible by the work of Eugene Garfield and his Science Citation Index. This article reviews the distance that bibliometrics has travelled since 1958 by comparing early bibliometrics with current practice, and by giving an overview of a range of recent developments, such as patent analysis, national research evaluation exercises, visualization techniques, new applications, online citation indexes, and the creation of digital libraries. Webometrics, a modern, fast-growing offshoot of bibliometrics, is reviewed in detail. Finally, future prospects are discussed with regard to both bibliometrics and webometrics.