The Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI, now Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, PA) citation databases have been used for decades as a starting point and often as the only tools for locating citations andsor conducting citation analyses. The ISI databases (or Web of Science [WoS]), however, may no longer be sufficient because new databases and tools that allow citation searching are now available. Using citations to the work of 25 library and information science (LIS) faculty members as a case study, the authors examine the effects of using Scopus and Google Scholar (GS) on the citation counts and rankings of scholars as measured by WoS. Overall, more than 10,000 citing and purportedly citing documents were examined. Results show that Scopus significantly alters the relative ranking of those scholars that appear in the middle of the rankings and that GS stands out in its coverage of conference proceedings as well as international, non-English language journals. The use of Scopus and GS, in addition to WoS, helps reveal a more accurate and comprehensive picture of the scholarly impact of authors. The WoS data took about 100 hours of collecting and processing time, Scopus consumed 200 hours, and GS a grueling 3,000 hours. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

/pdf/impact-of-data-sources-on-citation-counts-and-rankings-of-2tnouh7btp.pdf

Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar

This paper compares the h-indices of a list of highly-cited Israeli researchers based on citations counts retrieved from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar respectively. In several case the results obtained through Google Scholar are considerably different from the results based on the Web of Science and Scopus. Data cleansing is discussed extensively.

https://sci2s.ugr.es/sites/default/files/files/TematicWebSites/hindex/Bar-Ilan2008.pdf

Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar

Social media are increasingly being used as an information source, including information related to risks and crises. The current study examines how pieces of information available in social media impact perceptions of source credibility. Specifically, participants in the study were asked to view 1 of 3 mockTwitter.compages that varied the recency with which tweets were posted and then to report on their perceived source credibility of the page owner. Data indicate that recency of tweets impacts source credibility; however, this relationship is mediated by cognitive elaboration. These data suggest many implications for theory and application, both in computer-mediated communication and crisis communication. These implications are discussed, along with limitations of the current study and directions for future research.

/pdf/social-media-as-information-source-recency-of-updates-and-5fi9jzvly6.pdf

Social Media as Information Source: Recency of Updates and Credibility of Information

Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review

Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature

This article presents the results of a 2003 undergraduate library user survey as a case study of Generation Y. Survey data support four main traits attributed to Generation Y, which are discussed within the context of library use and satisfaction. Implications for future directions in academic library services based on the new ways Generation Y learn and use the library are explored.

/pdf/what-students-want-generation-y-and-the-changing-function-of-16l3s9kqm2.pdf

What Students Want: Generation Y and the Changing Function of the Academic Library

Purpose – To provide a summary of the main features of Google Scholar.Design/methodology/approach – Reviews, contextualizes and provides a summary of Google Scholar.Findings – This article compares the results of a sample search on “homeschooling in Google Scholar against the results in three fee‐based article index databases in the social sciences: PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index, and ERIC. Comparisons are done in the areas of content, currency, relevancy, and overlap. Google Scholar yields more results and a greater variety in its types of sources along with a higher rate of relevancy, but less currency. Ultimately, Scholar’s lack of quality control and inability to let the user manipulate data make it less effective than the fee‐based databases at finding scholarly material in the social sciences.Originality/value – Provides a useful summary for information professionals.

Gaga over Google? Scholar in the Social Sciences

An Analysis of Academic Library Web Pages for Faculty.

The Impact of Electronic Journals on Library Staff at ARL Member Institutions: A Survey and a Critique of the Survey Methodology☆

https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/9w0326666

Susan Gardner

Papers

What Students Want: Generation Y and the Changing Function of the Academic Library

Gaga over Google? Scholar in the Social Sciences

An Analysis of Academic Library Web Pages for Faculty.

The Impact of Electronic Journals on Library Staff at ARL Member Institutions: A Survey and a Critique of the Survey Methodology☆

The Impact of Electronic Journals on Library Staff at ARL Member Institutions