Comprehensiveness and uniqueness of commercial databases and open access systems
In this study, scholarly communication systems provided by commercial services and open access systems are examined on the basis of the comprehensiveness and uniqueness of their coverage. Commercial databases (Web of Science and Scopus) are compared with search engine (Google Scholar), aggregate institutional repositories (OAIster and OpenDOAR), and the open access system for physics research (arXiv). Retrievals were conducted from the six databases or systems, and the output at each location was compared with that at the others. Journal articles published by Nobel laureates in physics from 2001 to 2013 were selected as samples in this study. The study reveals that search engine tend to provide more resources than do commercial databases but also that commercial databases have better coverage than institutional repositories. Institutional repositories showed a zero percentage of uniqueness when compared with Google Scholar. The results of the present study may provide suggestions to researchers, thereby enabling them to select better information and reference sources for scholarly assessment of individual research productivity and influence; consequently, their international visibility and diffusion may be enhanced.
KeywordsCitation index database Open access system Comprehensiveness of database coverage Scholarly communication Academic assessment
This work was supported by Grant MOST 102-2410-H-004-221-MY2 from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C.
- Institutional repository. (2019). In Wikipedia. Retrieved July 12, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_repository.
- 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
- LaBorie, T. (1985). Library and information science abstracting and index service: Coverage, overlap, and context. Library and Information Science Research, 7(1), 183–195.Google Scholar
- Mitra, A., & Awekar, A. (2017). On low overlap between search results of academic search engines. In 2017 international World Wide Web conference (pp. 823–824). April 3–7, 2017. http://papers.www2017.com.au.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/companion/p823.pdf.
- Poyer, P. K. (1984). Journal article overlap between Index Medicus, Science Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, and Chemical Abstracts. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 72(4), 353–357.Google Scholar
- Science watch. (2013). Successful predictions. Retrieved April 5, 2017, from http://ppt.cc/xA6s.
- Zhu, S., Deng, X., Fang, Q., & Zheng, W. (2008). A study on web searching: Overlap and distance of the search engine results. In J. Wang (Ed.), Data warehousing and mining: Concepts, methodologies, tools and applications (Chapter 4.18, 1926–1937). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Retrieved from: https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=1bpEifVEi2MC&printsec=.