Abstract
Reliability of citation searches is a cornerstone of bibliometric research. The authors compare simultaneous search returns at two sites to demonstrate discrepancies that can occur as a result of differences in institutional subscriptions to the Web of Science and Web of Knowledge. Such discrepancies may have significant implications for the reliability of bibliometric research in general, but also for the calculation of individual and group indices used for promotion and funding decisions. The authors caution care when describing the methods used in bibliometric analysis and when evaluating researchers from different institutions. In both situations a description of the specific databases used would enable greater reliability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Fuller, C. D., Choi, M., & Thomas, C. R. Jr. (2009). Bibliometric analysis of radiation oncology departmental scholarly publication productivity at domestic residency training institutions. Journal of American College of Radiology, 6(2), 112–118.
Garfield, E. (1990). Journal editors awaken to the impact of citation errors. How we control them at ISI. Current Contents, 41, 5–13.
Hagen, N. T. (2008). Harmonic allocation of authorship credit: Source-level correction of bibliometric bias assures accurate publication and citation analysis. PLoS One, 3(12), e4021.
Hirsh, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS, 102(46), 16569–16572.
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.
Lee, J., Kraus, K. L., Couldwell, W. T. (2009). Use of the h index in neurosurgery. Journal of Neurosurgery, 111(2), 387–392.
Moed, H. F., & Vriens, M. (1989). Possible inaccuracies occurring in citation analysis. Journal of Information Science, 15(2), 95–102.
Osca-Lluch, J., Molla, C. C., & Ortega, M. P. (2009). Consequences of the error in bibliographical references. Psicothema, 21(2), 300–303.
Sorensen, A. A. (2009). Alzheimer’s disease research: Scientific productivity and impact of the top 100 investigators in the field. Journal of Alzheimers Disease, 16(3), 451–465.
Sypsa, V., & Hatzakis, A. (2009). Assessing the impact of biomedical research in academic institutions of disparate sizes. BMC Research Methodology, 9(1), 33.
Thompson, D. F., Callen, E. C., & Nahata, M. C. (2009). Publication metrics and record of pharmacy practice chairs. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 43(2), 268–275.
Zhang, C. T. (2009). The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS One, 4(5), e5429.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Table
(DOC 325 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Derrick, G.E., Sturk, H., Haynes, A.S. et al. A cautionary bibliometric tale of two cities. Scientometrics 84, 317–320 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0118-7
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0118-7