- -

A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013)

RiuNet: Institutional repository of the Polithecnic University of Valencia

Share/Send to

Cited by

Statistics

A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013)

Show simple item record

Files in this item

dc.contributor.author Martín-Martín, Alberto es_ES
dc.contributor.author Orduña Malea, Enrique es_ES
dc.contributor.author Ayllon, Juan M. es_ES
dc.contributor.author Delgado-López-Cózar, Emilio es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2017-06-02T12:23:01Z
dc.date.available 2017-06-02T12:23:01Z
dc.date.issued 2016
dc.identifier.issn 0210-0614
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/82268
dc.description.abstract The main objective of this paper is to identify and define the core characteristics of the set of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (document types, language, free availability, sources, and number of versions), on the hypothesis that the wide coverage of this search engine may provide a different portrait of these documents with respect to that offered by traditional bibliographic databases. To do this, a query per year was carried out from 1950 to 2013 identifying the top 1,000 documents retrieved from Google Scholar and obtaining a final sample of 64,000 documents, of which 40% provided a free link to full-text. The results obtained show that the average highly-cited document is a journal or book article (62% of the top 1% most cited documents of the sample), written in English (92.5% of all documents) and available online in PDF format (86.0% of all documents). Yet, the existence of errors should be noted, especially when detecting duplicates and linking citations properly. Nonetheless, the fact that the study focused on highly cited papers minimizes the effects of these limitations. Given the high presence of books and, to a lesser extent, of other document types (such as proceedings or reports), the present research concludes that the Google Scholar data offer an original and different vision of the most influential academic documents (measured from the perspective of their citation count), a set composed not only of strictly scientific material (journal articles) but also of academic material in its broadest sense. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship Alberto Martin-Martin enjoys a four-year doctoral fellowship (FPU2013/05863) granted by the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports. Juan Manuel Ayllon enjoys a four-year doctoral fellowship (BES-2012-054980) granted by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Enrique Orduna-Malea holds a postdoctoral fellowship (PAID-10-14), from the Polytechnic University of Valencia (Spain). en_EN
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) es_ES
dc.relation info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MECD//FPU2013%2F05863/ES/FPU2013%2F05863/ es_ES
dc.relation info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MINECO//BES-2012-054980/ES/BES-2012-054980/ es_ES
dc.relation Polytechnic University of Valencia (Spain) PAID-10-14 es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Revista española de Documentación Científica es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento - No comercial (by-nc) es_ES
dc.subject Google Scholar es_ES
dc.subject Academic search engines es_ES
dc.subject Highly-cited documents es_ES
dc.subject Academic books es_ES
dc.subject Open access es_ES
dc.subject.classification COMUNICACION AUDIOVISUAL Y PUBLICIDAD es_ES
dc.subject.classification BIBLIOTECONOMIA Y DOCUMENTACION es_ES
dc.title A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013) es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.3989/redc.2016.4.1405
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Instituto de Diseño para la Fabricación y Producción Automatizada - Institut de Disseny per a la Fabricació i Producció Automatitzada es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Martín-Martín, A.; Orduña Malea, E.; Ayllon, JM.; Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2016). A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013). Revista española de Documentación Científica. 39(4):1-21. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1405 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1405 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 1 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 21 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 39 es_ES
dc.description.issue 4 es_ES
dc.relation.senia 328129 es_ES
dc.contributor.funder Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte es_ES
dc.contributor.funder Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad es_ES
dc.description.references Aguillo, I. F., Ortega, J. L., Fernández, M., & Utrilla, A. M. (2010). Indicators for a webometric ranking of open access repositories. Scientometrics, 82(3), 477-486. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0183-y es_ES
dc.description.references Aguillo, I. F. (2011). Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis. Scientometrics, 91(2), 343-351. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0582-8 es_ES
dc.description.references Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12(3), 159-170. doi:10.3152/147154403781776645 es_ES
dc.description.references Aksnes, D. W., & Sivertsen, G. (2004). The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics, 59(2), 213-224. doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018529.58334.eb es_ES
dc.description.references Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Citations to the «Introduction to informetrics» indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 82(3), 495-506. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0185-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Beel, J., Gipp, B., & Wilde, E. (2010). Academic Search Engine Optimization (ASEO). Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41(2), 176-190. doi:10.3138/jsp.41.2.176 es_ES
dc.description.references Björk, B.-C., Welling, P., Laakso, M., Majlender, P., Hedlund, T., & Guðnason, G. (2010). Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009. PLoS ONE, 5(6), e11273. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011273 es_ES
dc.description.references Bornmann, L. (2010). Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010) paper. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 441-443. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.04.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2011). Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 228-230. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.009 es_ES
dc.description.references Bornmann, L., Marx, W., Schier, H., Rahm, E., Thor, A., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009). Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry—Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics, 3(1), 27-35. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.11.001 es_ES
dc.description.references Bornmann, L., de Moya Anegón, F., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The new Excellence Indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 333-335. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.006 es_ES
dc.description.references Garfield, E. (1977). Introducing Citation Classics: the human side of scientific papers. Current Contents, vol. 3 (1), 1-2. es_ES
dc.description.references Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1(4), 359-375. doi:10.1007/bf02019306 es_ES
dc.description.references Glanzel, W., & Czerwon, H.-J. (1992). What are highly cited publications? A method applied to German scientific papers, 1980-1989. Research Evaluation, 2(3), 135-141. doi:10.1093/rev/2.3.135 es_ES
dc.description.references Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1992). Some facts and figures on highly cited papers in the sciences, 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 25(3), 373-380. doi:10.1007/bf02016926 es_ES
dc.description.references Glanzel, W., Rinia, E. J., & Brocken, M. G. M. (1995). A bibliometric study of highly cited European physics papers in the 80s. Research Evaluation, 5(2), 113-122. doi:10.1093/rev/5.2.113 es_ES
dc.description.references Harzing, A.-W. (2012). A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1057-1075. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0777-7 es_ES
dc.description.references Harzing, A.-W. (2013). A longitudinal study of Google Scholar coverage between 2012 and 2013. Scientometrics, 98(1), 565-575. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-0975-y es_ES
dc.description.references Harzing, A., & van der Wal, R. (2008). Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8, 61-73. doi:10.3354/esep00076 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacsó, P. (2005). Google Scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Information Review, 29(2), 208-214. doi:10.1108/14684520510598066 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacso, P. (2006). Deflated, inflated and phantom citation counts. Online Information Review, 30(3), 297-309. doi:10.1108/14684520610675816 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacsó, P. (2008). The pros and cons of computing the h‐index using Scopus. Online Information Review, 32(4), 524-535. doi:10.1108/14684520810897403 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacso´, P. (2008). The pros and cons of computing the h‐index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32(3), 437-452. doi:10.1108/14684520810889718 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacsó, P. (2012). Using Google Scholar for journal impact factors and the h‐index in nationwide publishing assessments in academia – siren songs and air‐raid sirens. Online Information Review, 36(3), 462-478. doi:10.1108/14684521211241503 es_ES
dc.description.references Jamali, H. R., & Nabavi, M. (2015). Open access and sources of full-text articles in Google Scholar in different subject fields. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1635-1651. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1642-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Khabsa, M., & Giles, C. L. (2014). The Number of Scholarly Documents on the Public Web. PLoS ONE, 9(5), e93949. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093949 es_ES
dc.description.references Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics, 74(2), 273-294. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0217-x es_ES
dc.description.references Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., & Rezaie, S. (2011). Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(11), 2147-2164. doi:10.1002/asi.21608 es_ES
dc.description.references Kresge, N.; Simoni, R. D.; Hill, R. L. (2005). The most highly cited paper in publishing history: Protein determination by Oliver H. Lowry. Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 280 (28), e25. http://www.jbc.org/content/280/28/e25 es_ES
dc.description.references Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2008). The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns. Scientometrics, 78(1), 45-67. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1927-1 es_ES
dc.description.references Maltrás Barba, B. (2003). Los indicadores bibliométricos: fundamentos y aplicación al análisis de la ciencia. Gijón: Trea. es_ES
dc.description.references Martín-Martín, A., Ayllón, J. M., Delgado López-Cózar, E., & Orduna-Malea, E. (2015). Nature’s top 100 Re-revisited. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(12), 2714-2714. doi:10.1002/asi.23570 es_ES
dc.description.references Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125. doi:10.1002/asi.20677 es_ES
dc.description.references Narin, F. (1987). Bibliometric techniques in the evaluation of research programs. Science and Public Policy, vol. 14(2), 99-106. es_ES
dc.description.references Narin, F., Frame, J. D., & Carpenter, M. P. (1983). Highly Cited Soviet Papers: An Exploratory Investigation. Social Studies of Science, 13(2), 307-319. doi:10.1177/030631283013002006 es_ES
dc.description.references Oppenheim, C., & Renn, S. P. (1978). Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(5), 225-231. doi:10.1002/asi.4630290504 es_ES
dc.description.references Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2013). Google Scholar Metrics evolution: an analysis according to languages. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2353-2367. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1164-8 es_ES
dc.description.references Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., Martín-Martín, A., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2015). Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 104(3), 931-949. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1614-6 es_ES
dc.description.references Orduña-Malea, E., Serrano-Cobos, J., Ontalba-Ruipérez, J. A., & Lloret-Romero, N. (2010). Presencia y visibilidad web de las universidades públicas españolas. Revista española de Documentación Científica, 33(2), 246-278. doi:10.3989/redc.2010.2.740 es_ES
dc.description.references Ortega, Jose L. (2014). Academic Search Engines: A Quantitative Outlook. London: Elsevier. es_ES
dc.description.references Persson, O. (2009). Are highly cited papers more international? Scientometrics, 83(2), 397-401. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0007-0 es_ES
dc.description.references P. Pitol, S., & L. De Groote, S. (2014). Google Scholar versions: do more versions of an article mean greater impact? Library Hi Tech, 32(4), 594-611. doi:10.1108/lht-05-2014-0039 es_ES
dc.description.references Plomp, R. (1990). The significance of the number of highly cited papers as an indicator of scientific prolificacy. Scientometrics, 19(3-4), 185-197. doi:10.1007/bf02095346 es_ES
dc.description.references Smith, D. R. (2009). Highly Cited Articles in Environmental and Occupational Health, 1919–1960. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 64(sup1), 32-42. doi:10.1080/19338240903286743 es_ES
dc.description.references Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002). Scientometrics, 54(3), 381-397. doi:10.1023/a:1016082432660 es_ES
dc.description.references Van Noorden, R., Maher, B., & Nuzzo, R. (2014). The top 100 papers. Nature, 514(7524), 550-553. doi:10.1038/514550a es_ES
dc.description.references Van Raan, A. F. J., & Hartmann, D. (1987). The comparative impact of scientific publications and journals: Methods of measurement and graphical display. Scientometrics, 11(5-6), 325-331. doi:10.1007/bf02279352 es_ES
dc.description.references De Winter, J. C. F., Zadpoor, A. A., & Dodou, D. (2013). The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1547-1565. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1089-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Yang, K., & Meho, L. I. (2007). Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1-15. doi:10.1002/meet.14504301185 es_ES


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record