Send us a link

Subscribe to our newsletter

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations' COCI: a Multidisciplinary Comparison of Coverage Via Citations

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations' COCI: a Multidisciplinary Comparison of Coverage Via Citations

New sources of citation data have recently become available. Although these have been compared to the Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, or Google Scholar, there is no systematic evidence of their differences across subject categories. In response, this paper investigates citations found by these data sources to English-language highly-cited documents published in 2006 from 252 subject categories, expanding and updating the largest previous study.

Citations Systematically Misrepresent the Quality and Impact of Research Articles: Survey and Experimental Evidence from Thousands of Citers

Citations Systematically Misrepresent the Quality and Impact of Research Articles: Survey and Experimental Evidence from Thousands of Citers

Citations are ubiquitous in evaluating research, but how exactly they relate to what they are thought to measure is unclear. This article investigates the relationships between citations, quality, and impact using a survey with an embedded experiment.

Stagnation and Scientific Incentives

Stagnation and Scientific Incentives

This paper presents a simple model of the lifecycle of scientific ideas that points to changes in scientist incentives as the cause of scientific stagnation. It explores ways to broaden how scientific productivity is measured and rewarded, involving both academic search engines such as Google Scholar measuring which contributions explore newer ideas and university administrators and funding agencies utilizing these new metrics in research evaluation.

Tracking Self-Citations in Academic Publishing

Tracking Self-Citations in Academic Publishing

Citation metrics have value because they aim to make scientific assessment a level playing field, but urgent transparency-based changes are necessary to ensure that the data yields an accurate picture. One problematic area is the handling of self-citations.

Inferring the Causal Effect of Journals on Citations

Inferring the Causal Effect of Journals on Citations

Articles in high-impact journals are by definition more highly cited on average. But are they cited more often because the articles are somehow "better"? Or are they cited more often simply because they appeared in a high-impact journal?

Highly Cited Researchers in Web of Science

Highly Cited Researchers in Web of Science

Recognizing the world's most influential researchers  of the past decade, demonstrated by the production of multiple highly-cited papers that rank in the top 1% by citations for field and year in Web of Science.

Careless Citations Don't Just Spread Scientific Myths - They Can Make Them Stronger

Careless Citations Don't Just Spread Scientific Myths - They Can Make Them Stronger

How misconceptions persist and proliferate within the scientific literature.

Two-thirds of Researchers Report 'pressure to Cite' in Nature Poll

Two-thirds of Researchers Report 'pressure to Cite' in Nature Poll

Readers say they have been asked to reference seemingly superfluous studies after peer review.

Citecorp: Working with Open Citations - ROpenSci - Open Tools for Open Science

Citecorp: Working with Open Citations - ROpenSci - Open Tools for Open Science

citecorp is a new (hit CRAN in late August) R package for working with data from the OpenCitations Corpus (OCC). OpenCitations, run by David Shotton and Silvio Peroni, houses the OCC, an open repository of scholarly citation data under the very open CC0 license. The I4OC (Initiative for Open Citations) is a collaboration between many parties, with the aim of promoting "unrestricted availability of scholarly citation data". Citation data is available through Crossref, and available in R via our packages rcrossref, fulltext and crminer.

A Standardized Citation Metrics Author Database Annotated for Scientific Field

A Standardized Citation Metrics Author Database Annotated for Scientific Field

Citation metrics are widely used and misused. This Community Page article presents a publicly available database that provides standardized information on multiple citation indicators and a composite thereof, annotating each author according to his/her main scientific field(s).

Elsevier Investigates Hundreds of Peer Reviewers for Manipulating Citations

Elsevier Investigates Hundreds of Peer Reviewers for Manipulating Citations

The publisher is scrutinizing researchers who might be inappropriately using the review process to promote their own work.

OpenCitations

OpenCitations is a scholarly infrastructure organization dedicated to open scholarship and the publication of open bibliographic and citation data as Linked Open Data using Semantic Web technologies, to the development of software tools and services that enable convenient access to these open data, and to community advocacy for open citations. This paper describes OpenCitations and its datasets, tools, services and activities.

Rare Case of Gender Parity in Academia

Rare Case of Gender Parity in Academia

The results of this study strongly suggest that when male and female authors publish articles that are comparably positioned to receive citations, their publications do in fact accrue citations at the same rate. This raises the question: Why would gender matter “everywhere but here”? 

Bringing Citations and Usage Metrics Together to Make Data Count

Bringing Citations and Usage Metrics Together to Make Data Count

Over the last years, many organizations have been working on infrastructure to facilitate sharing and reuse of research data - but what is needed to make data count?

Well-formed.eigenfactor.org : Visualizing Information Flow in Science

Well-formed.eigenfactor.org : Visualizing Information Flow in Science

Information-aesthetic explorations of emerging patterns in scientific citation networks. A cooperation between the Eigenfactor® Project (data analysis) and Moritz Stefaner (visualization).

Making Magic Happen: Implementing and Contributing Data Citations in Support of Today's Scholarship

Making Magic Happen: Implementing and Contributing Data Citations in Support of Today's Scholarship

If we believe data should be valued like other research outputs, we must take action to achieve this. Supporting the open data movement means providing proper support for data citations.

Why (almost) Everything We Know About Citations is Wrong: Evidence from Authors

Why (almost) Everything We Know About Citations is Wrong: Evidence from Authors

Although citations and related metrics like the H-index are widely used in academia to evaluate research and allocate resources, the referencing decisions on which they are based are poorly understood. This paper investigates whether authors reference works that influenced them most or those they believe the readers will value most.

EXCITE: Extraction of Citations from PDF Documents

EXCITE: Extraction of Citations from PDF Documents

DFG-funded software provides different online services to extract and segment citations. Moreover, other online tools are available to create more gold standard data.

How Many Wikipedia References Are Available to Read? We Measured the Proportion of Open Access Sources Across Languages and Topics

How Many Wikipedia References Are Available to Read? We Measured the Proportion of Open Access Sources Across Languages and Topics

When following a link to the official version of a scholarly article, Wikipedia readers are twice as likely to hit a paywall than one they can freely read.

Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A Systematic Comparison of Citations in 252 Subject Categories

Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A Systematic Comparison of Citations in 252 Subject Categories

Preprint suggests that in all areas Google Scholar citation data is essentially a superset of Web of Science and Scopus, with substantial extra coverage.