Scientometrics

, Volume 107, Issue 3, pp 1477–1487 | Cite as

Back to the past: on the shoulders of an academic search engine giant

  • Alberto Martín-Martín
  • Enrique Orduna-Malea
  • Juan M. Ayllón
  • Emilio Delgado López-Cózar
Article

Abstract

A study released by the Google Scholar team found an apparently increasing fraction of citations to old articles from studies published in the last 24 years (1990–2013). To demonstrate this finding we conducted a complementary study using a different data source (Journal Citation Reports), metric (aggregate cited half-life), time spam (2003–2013), and set of categories (53 Social Science subject categories and 167 Science subject categories). Although the results obtained confirm and reinforce the previous findings, the possible causes of this phenomenon keep unclear. We finally hypothesize that “first page results syndrome” in conjunction with the fact that Google Scholar favours the most cited documents are suggesting the growing trend of citing old documents is partly caused by Google Scholar.

Keywords

Google Scholar Journal Citation Reports Growth of science Science obsolescence Half-life indicator Academic search engines 

References

  1. Beel, J., & Gipp, B. (2009). Google Scholar’s ranking algorithm: an introductory overview. In B. Larsen & J. Leta (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics (Vol. 1, pp. 230–241). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.Google Scholar
  2. Burton, R. E., & Kebler, R. W. (1960). The half-life of some scientific and technical literatures. American Documentation, 11(1), 18–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis, P. M. & Cochran, A. (2015). Cited half-life of the journal literature. http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.07479. Accessed 22 July 2015.
  4. Egghe, L. (1993). On the influence of growth on obsolescence. Scientometrics, 27(2), 195–214.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (2000). Aging, obsolescence, impact, growth, and utilization: Definitions and relations. Journal of the American Society for information science, 51(11), 1004–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gosnell, C. F. (1944). Obsolescence of books in college libraries. College and Research Libraries, 5(2), 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gross, P. L. K., & Gross, E. M. (1927). College libraries and chemical education. Science, 66(1713), 385–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Larivière, V., Archambault, É., & Gingras, Y. (2008). Long-term variations in the aging of scientific literature: From exponential growth to steady-state science (1900–2004). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(2), 288–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Line, M. B. (1970). The ‘half-life’ of periodical literature: Apparent and real obsolescence. Journal of Documentation, 26(1), 46–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllon, J. M. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). Does Google Scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950–2013)? EC3 Working Papers, 19. http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.8464. Accessed 22 July 2015.
  11. Nakamoto, H. (1988). Synchronous and diachronous citation distributions. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87/88 (pp. 157–163). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  12. Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllon, J. M., Martín-Martín, A., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2015). Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 104(3), 931–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). Google Scholar Metrics evolution: An analysis according to languages. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2353–2367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Orduna-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., Ayllon, J. M., & Delgado Lopez-Cozar, E. (2014). The silent fading of an academic search engine: The case of Microsoft Academic Search. Online Information Review, 38(7), 936–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ortega, J. L. (2014). Academic search engines: A quantitative outlook. Chandos information professional series. Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. Price, D. J. S. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Ruiz-Baños, R., & Jimenez-Contreras, E. (1996). Envejecimiento de la literatura científica en documentación. Influencia del origen nacional de las revistas. Estudio de una muestra. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 19(1), 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2008). Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. D-Lib, 14(11/12). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november08/tenopir/11tenopir.html. Accessed 22 July 2015.
  19. Van Noorden, R. (2014). Google Scholar pioneer on search engine’s future. Nature News. http://www.nature.com/news/google-scholar-pioneer-on-search-engine-s-future-1.16269. Accessed 22 July 2015.
  20. Varshney, L. R. (2012). The Google effect in doctoral theses. Scientometrics, 92(3), 785–793.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Verstak, A., Acharya, A., Suzuki, H., Henderson, S., Iakhiaev, M., Lin, C. C. Y., et al. (2014). On the shoulders of giants: The growing impact of older articles. http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.0275. Accessed 22 July 2015.

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto Martín-Martín
    • 1
  • Enrique Orduna-Malea
    • 2
  • Juan M. Ayllón
    • 1
  • Emilio Delgado López-Cózar
    • 1
  1. 1.EC3 Research GroupUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.EC3 Research GroupPolytechnic University of ValenciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations