nC8ulC !Cu8nAL Cl lnlC8MA1lCn Ll1L8AC?

ln PlCPL8 LuuCA1lCn
2009, vol. 1, lssue 1, 41-31 norll.ulb.no


Receiveu: 22 Nay 2uu8; Reviseu: 16 Septembei 2uu8; Accepteu: 2S Febiuaiy 2uu9
Noiuic }ouinal of Infoimation Liteiacy in Bighei Euucation, 2uu9. 2uu9 Susanne Nikki
This is an 0pen Access aiticle uistiibuteu unuei the teims of the Cieative Commons Attiibution-Noncommeicial S.u
0npoiteu License (http:cieativecommons.oiglicensesby-ncS.u).

Goog|e Scho|ar Compared to Web of
Sc|ence: A L|terature kev|ew
!"#$%%& ()**)
+

0niveisity of Beigen
,-#./$0.
The scope of the aiticle is to give a liteiatuie ieview ovei compaiison of the two seivices. To
obtain insight into uoogle Scholai, it is testeu against Web of Science (WoS), the most iecognizeu
piopiietaiy uatabase foi peei ievieweu jouinal content. Both uatabases aie multiuisciplinaiy,
pioviue links to libiaiy holuings anu offei oppoitunities foi expoit of iefeiences. In auuition
they have the poweiful featuie of tiacking citing items. Compaiisons aie baseu on uatabase
content, iecall anu ieseaich impact measuies. The aiticle touches libiaiy teaching issues at
highei euucation institutions, anu aigues foi which ieasons uoogle Scholai along with WoS is
woithwhile to be incluueu in the libiaiy piogiams foi infoimation liteiacy teaching. uoogle
Scholai is populai among faculty staff anu stuuents, but has been met with scepticism by libiaiy
piofessionals anu theiefoie not yet establisheu as subject foi teaching.
1&234/5#: infoimation liteiacy; teaching; libiaiy anu infoimation science
+64%.$0.7
S. Nikki, ui.scient. anu Senioi Acauemic Libiaiian
Beigen 0niveisity Libiaiy, Science Libiaiy, Beigen, Noiway
E-mail: susanne.mikkiuib.no

!" $%&&%

42
8ackground
0ne of the main tasks at ieseaich libiaiies is to teach infoimation liteiacy. As uefineu by the
Association of College anu Reseaich Libiaiies (2uuu), infoimation liteiacy consists of a set of
abilities iequiiing inuiviuuals to "iecognize when infoimation is neeueu anu have the ability to
locate, evaluate, anu use effectively the neeueu infoimation". In that iegaiu, uatabase content is
ciucial foi locating infoimation. It is essential, that the seivices offei featuies to make it easy to
evaluate the seaich iesults, foi example by how often an item has been citeu. In oiuei to
efficiently use the infoimation it is impoitant to get fast access anu have the possibility to expoit
bibliogiaphic uata to common iefeience management tools.
Foi locating liteiatuie, tiauitionally Web of Science (No Bate) is iegaiueu as the most
useful anu tiustful souice anu theiefoie, at least foi subjects wheie publications mainly appeai
in jouinals, main subject foi teaching. WoS has a thoiough jouinal selection piocess baseu on
publication stanuaius, expeit juugements, iegulai appeaiances anu quality of citation uata
(uaifielu, 199u). Its iichly stiuctuieu uata is a piemise foi auvanceu, contiolleu seaiches.
uoogle Scholai (No Bate) coveis a wiuei vaiiety of publications than Web of Science
(WoS). It is baseu on agieements of use with the jouinal publisheis, uatabase venuois oi
scholaily societies. Bowevei, content lacks impoitant souices anu the amount of noise makes
the seivice less useful foi thoioughly liteiatuie seaiching. Its seaich algoiithm is uevelopeu to
ietuin best matches, incluuing items appaiently not matching the seaich expiession. Compaieu
to WoS, less uegiee of contiol is offeieu foi peifoiming systematically seaiches. uoogle Scholai,
theiefoie, has been met with scepticism anu not yet been ieally establisheu as subject foi
teaching. As summaiizeu by Biewiy (2uu7), the ciiticism is ielateu to issues as inaccuiate
notification of content anu inefficient use of metauata.
Bowevei, a usei stuuy among stuuents at 0ppsala 0niveisity in Sweuen measuiing the
effect of tiaining foi uoogle Scholai showeu that stuuents may be enableu to ietiieve full text
peei-ievieweu uocuments, ielevant foi theii assignment (Baya, Nygien, & Wiumaik, 2uu7).
0sing uoogle Scholai hau a positive effect anu incieaseu theii uegiee of infoimation liteiacy
accoiuing to the aspects of locating anu using infoimation. Biewiy (2uu7) even iefeis to uoogle
Scholai as a new paiauigm in acauemic ieseaich.
Also auvanceu ieseaicheis extensively use uoogle foi seaiching. It offeis easiei access to
full text than many libiaiy pioviueu poitals (Baglunu & 0lsson, 2uu8; Baya et al., 2uu7; Webb,
uannon-Leaiy, & Bent, 2uu7, pp. 18-2u). As uiscusseu by Booth (2uu7), acauemic ieseaicheis
use citeu iefeience seaiching oi known authoi seaiching iathei than a keywoiu appioach to
covei theii infoimation neeu. This way of infoimation hanuling matches well with seivices
offeieu by foi example uoogle Scholai. Baglunu anu 0lsson (2uu8) claim that ieseaicheis
piefeiably use theii netwoiks anu peifoim simple, aimless anu unstiuctuieu seaiches to access
infoimation. As the saying goes "It is only libiaiians that love to seaich, eveiyone else wants to
finu", they suggest that libiaiies shoulu take the behavioui of ieseaicheis into consiueiation
when uesigning theii seivices. Bowevei, unoiganizeu online seaiching, following hypeilinks,
naiiows the iange of finuings anu iueas ieseaich is builu upon (Evans, 2uu8). Evans founu that
as moie publications aie publisheu uigitally, the aiticles citeu tenu to be fewei anu moie iecent.
Be feais that this tienu, acceleiate consensus, while alteinative iueas that uo not become
consensus quickly, may be foigotten befoie theii useful impact is iecognizeu.
This shoit intiouuction shows that theie is a uisciepancy between the aims of libiaiians
anu ieseaicheis iegaiuing the use of infoimation seaich tools. As pointeu out, being infoimation
liteiate consists of many aspects. Teaching infoimation liteiacy is wiuei than instiucting seaich
techniques foi locating infoimation. Foi libiaiy anu infoimation peisonnel, this involves a
ueepei awaieness about the seivices anu how they affect science.
Coogle Scholar compared Lo Web of Sclence. A llLeraLure revlew

4S
A|ms and Cb[ect|ves
The cuiient stuuy aims at constiucting a ueepei unueistanuing of uoogle Scholai. It is baseu on
a simple seaich test to exemplify uatabase featuies anu a liteiatuie ieview foi assessing content
anu citation metiics. Fuithei, the impact on teaching is uiscusseu.
Database Ieatures
Citeu iefeience seaiching is, as alieauy pinpointeu by uaifielu in 19SS, a iecognizeu methou foi
seaiching. Alike WoS, uoogle Scholai keeps tiack of the citation uata, anu offeis an efficient tool
foi finuing ielevant souices. 0tilizing the fact that citing anu citeu uocuments aie associateu to
each othei; infoimation can be ietiieveu inuepenuent of language anu uesciiptois as subject
heauings oi classification coues. Eugene uaifielu's iuea of citation seaiching leau to the poweiful
Science Citation Inuex (WoS). The Science Citation Inuex iemaineu as the unique online citation
seivice until 2uu4, when Elseviei's Scopus anu uoogle Scholai weie launcheu. It is natuial to
compaie uoogle Scholai with WoS, both in ielation to coveiage anu ianking because they both
aie multiuisciplinaiy anu incluue citation uata.
In WoS citations aie contiolleu paitly manually. uoogle Scholai extiacts citation
automatically fiom iefeience lists of iecognizeu scientific uocuments. As iepoiteu by }acso
(2uuS; 2uu8) automatically inuexing can leau to misinteipietations anu noise, an annoying
featuie which might have been avoiueu if metauata hau been useu moie extensively. 0sually,
scholaily uocuments aie iichly stiuctuieu anu taggeu, seaichable by theii uesciiptois, anu
soiting them is possible in vaiious ways. This is the case foi subsciiption-baseu scholaily
uatabases, such as WoS. Bowevei, uoogle Scholai's use of metauata is insufficient. Although the
!"#$%&'" )&*+,$- )'$-&* (Figuie 1) offeis options foi seaiching Authoi, Publication, Bate anu
Subject Aiea, iesults uo not match piecisely the seaich expiession, anu even simple boolean
seaiches seem to be misinteipieteu. It is a best match system, baseu on uoogle Scholai's
algoiithm foi uetecting, filteiing anu ianking uocuments.

I|gure 1. Goog|e Scho|ar - Advanced search features

As iepoiteu by }acso (2uu8; 2uu6), most of the negative aspects of uoogle Scholai aie
ielateu to its softwaie featuies, such as insufficient giouping of iuentical citations, iesulting in
uuplicates, inflateu citation counts, anu the inability of piopeily iuentifying authois.
!" $%&&%

44

I|gure 2. Goog|e Scho|ar - resentat|on of search resu|ts



I|gure 3. WoS - resentat|on of search resu|ts

Coogle Scholar compared Lo Web of Sclence. A llLeraLure revlew

4S
Still, giouping of iuentical citations is a step in iight uiiection to ieuuce noise, see Figuie
2. The fact that uoogle Scholai inuexes the same uocuments fiom seveial souices, such as
commeicial uatabases, open access aichives anu homepages of institutions oi ieseaicheis, can
be consiueieu a stiength, since it facilitates fiee access. Also piovision of local libiaiy holuings,
by open 0RL-linking is a value-auueu featuie. This is exemplifieu in Figuie 2: "Noie at 0iB", foi
holuings at the 0niveisity of Beigen Libiaiy. It is enableu by the libiaiies, in oiuei to offei access
to theii collection such as subsciiption baseu jouinals.
The last line of the iecoiu of Figuie 2, shows the featuie "Impoit to EnuNote". This
possibility exemplifies one of seveial options foi expoiting iefeiences offeieu by uoogle Scholai.
Both this anu the full-text linkage aie useful anu efficient tools foi infoimation management,
woithwhile to incluue in libiaiy couises. Consiueiing uoogle Scholai still being in its beta
veisions, fuithei impiovements aie expecteu to come.
Goog|e Scho|ar - Content
The notification of content by uoogle Scholai itself is iathei vague, see Box 1. Bowevei, some
valuable infoimation can be extiacteu fiom numeious stuuies which have been caiiieu out ovei
the last yeais foi assessing content anu coveiage. As outlineu by 0'Leaiy (2uuS) content in
uoogle Scholai is pioviueu by
Piopiietaiy uatabases
Publisheis
Intianets of ieseaich institutions

Content has giown significantly; anu
uoogle Scholai has uone an outstanuing job
enteiing into paitneiship with acauemic
publisheis anu institutions, inuexing huge
amounts of theii scholaily content, incluuing
books, pioceeuings anu jouinals.
Bowevei, content is incomplete, still
missing impoitant publisheis anu top
ianking jouinals, whose uigital collections
aie only paitly inuexeu (}acso, 2uu8).
Fuitheimoie, }acso (2uuS) anu Neuhaus et
al. (2uu6) iepoit a uelay foi newly publisheu
items, finuing that uoogle Scholai is not as
iegulaily upuateu as othei uatabases
assesseu in theii ieseaich. Still the time lag is a pioblem foi bibliogiaphic uatabases in geneial
wheie iecently publisheu ieseaich may not be available foi a ceitain peiiou of time.
Some iecoius aie labelleu by type of uocument foi example |B00Kj (compaie Figuie 2,
fiist iecoiu on the list) oi |CITATI0Nj. These labels aie auueu to iecoius which aie
automatically iecognizeu as eithei a book oi a citation. Citations aie iefeiences extiacteu fiom
uocuments, anu in geneial uo not pioviue a link to the full text.
Search|ng for L Garf|e|d - An Lxamp|e
The uiffeient uatabase featuies can be illustiateu closei thiough a seaich foi . /$-01',", the
inventoi of the science citation inuex. Figuie 2 anu Figuie S list iesults seaiching in uoogle
Scholai anu WoS. The numbei of items ietiieveu is highest in uoogle Scholai with about 184u,
while the numbei ietiieveu in WoS is exactly 1S28. uoogle Scholai uoes not list moie than the
fiist 1uuu hits. Results iankeu lowei than 1uuu can theiefoie not be contiolleu, which is
pioblematic foi citation stuuies. Foi WoS the maximum numbei of uisplayeu items is

What is Google Scholar?
Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for
scholarly literature. From one place, you can search across many
disciplines and sources: peer-reviewed papers, theses, books,
abstracts and articles, from academic publishers, professional
societies, preprint repositories, universities and other scholarly
organizations. Google Scholar helps you identify the most relevant
research across the world of scholarly research.

Features of Google Scholar
Search diverse sources from one convenient place
Find papers, abstracts and citations
Locate the complete paper through your library or on the web
Learn about key papers in any area of research

How are articles ranked?
Google Scholar aims to sort articles the way researchers
do, weighing the full text of each article, the author, the
publication in which the article appears, and how often the
piece has been cited in other scholarly literature. The most
relevant results will always appear on the first page
!"# %& '(")* +"",-. /01"-23
(reLrleved 03.01.2008 from
hLLp://scholar.google.no/lnLl/en/scholar/abouL.hLml)
!" $%&&%

46
1u uuu. Applying the 213'" 4'0'-'%&' )'$-&* in WoS woulu have leau to a highei numbei
of seaich iesults mainly incluuing uuplicates, but also items not inuexeu by the seivice itself.
Theiefoie, the numbei of seaich iesults anu theii citations in WoS is in geneial unuei-iepoiteu.
Foi uoogle Scholai, howevei, the numbei is inflateu. This is uue to seveial factois, like
insufficient giouping (not shown in figuie), inclusion of authois with alike spellings without
exactly match to the queiy. This can be seen by confeiiing to hit S which shows iesult foi the
authoi RE uaifielu. This authoi actually contiibutes consiueiably to the iesult list, pioviuing
moie than a fouith of the hits. The item with highest citation count (71S) belongs to a book in
uoogle Scholai. Eugene uaifielu's lanumaik papei fiom 19SS ieceives S41 citations in uoogle
Scholai (see item S in Figuie 2) anu Suu in WoS (compaie to item 2 in Figuie S). Note that the
citation in uoogle Scholai is not his oiiginal woik publisheu in )&1'%&', but a iepiint in
5%3'-%$31+%$, 6+7-%$, +0 .81"'91+,+:; fiom 2uu6.
To sum up, this single example ieveals some chaiacteiistic featuies foi uoogle Scholai:
Results aie ovei-iepoiteu
Books ieceive high citation counts (Bai-Ilan, Levene, & Lin, 2uu7)
Citation counts aie similai foi uoogle Scholai anu WoS
Elueily aiticles not posteu on the web, aie not likely to be inuexeu (Neuhaus et al., 2uu6;
Pauly & Steigiou, 2uuS; Walteis, 2uu7)
Lack of content fiom ceitain publisheis, heie )&1'%&' (}acso, 2uu8; Neuhaus et al., 2uu6)

Books anu confeience pioceeuings, in geneial, aie not inuexeu by WoS, but still aie
valuable anu highly citeu souices. Especially foi ceitain uisciplines (e.g. physics, computei
science, anu technology) pioceeuings may be the main anu only souice foi publishing. Foi these
souices uoogle Scholai has pioveu its usefulness (}. Bai-Ilan, 2uu8; Neho & Yang, 2uu7). Also,
uocuments wiitten in a non-English language aie bettei coveieu by uoogle Scholai than in WoS
(}acso, 2uu6; Neho & Yang, 2uu7).
Comparat|ve Assessment of Content
Neuhaus et al. (2uu6) compaieu content of 47 uatabases fiom vaiious fielus of uisciplines with
uoogle Scholai. Su ianuomly selecteu uocuments fiom each uatabase weie tiieu iecalleu in
uoogle Scholai. Foi science anu meuicine 76% of uocuments weie coveieu by uoogle Scholai.
Begiee of coveiage foi othei subjects uecieaseu to 41% in euucation, S9% in social sciences anu
1u% in humanities. The coveiage of multiuisciplinaiy uatabases was ielateu to the uatabases as
follows; Syneigy (Blackwell) with 94% coveiage, Science Biiect anu Wiley InteiScience with
9u%, Ingenta with 82% anu SpiingeiLink with 68%.
The stuuy by Walteis (2uu7) assessing coveiage of a specific subject in social science (latei-
life-migiation) showeu that uoogle Scholai inuexeu the gieatest numbei of coie aiticles (9S%),
even though citations coulu be incomplete without linkage to full text oi without abstiacts. Bis
finuings uiffei fiom the stuuy by Neuhaus et al. peifoimeu one yeai eailiei, finuing only S9%
coveiage of social sciences in uoogle Scholai. The uiffeience may be explaineu by the methou of
sampling. Neuhaus et al. sampleu aiticles fiom selecteu uatabases thiough theii entiie time
iange, while Walteis only consiueieu aiticles publisheu fiom 199u to 2uuu. This may paitly
explain uoogle Scholai's low coveiage of ueoRef (26%) founu by Neuhaus et al. Elueily items
inuexeu in ueoRef aie seluom posteu on the web anu theiefoie not ietiievable by uoogle. In
auuition ueoRef incluues iecoius to publications wiitten in non-English languages, wheieas
uoogle Scholai has a pionounceu bias towaius English language (Neuhaus et al., 2uu6; Noiuzi,
2uuS). Nikki (foithcoming) compaieu WoS anu uoogle Scholai foi eaith science content. She
founu that 8S% of content in WoS was iecalleu by uoogle Scholai. Results weie baseu on 29
authoi seaiches. Although citation counts anu oiuei of uisplayeu iesults by the two seivices
weie similai, citation counts weie significantly highei in WoS foi aiticles inuexeu by both
seivices, confiiming WoS' position as a leauing citation inuex.
Coogle Scholar compared Lo Web of Sclence. A llLeraLure revlew

47
Bepenuent on uiscipline, uoogle Scholai uoes compete with WoS in iegaiu to locating
infoimation. uoogle Scholai is fast anu familiai foi many useis anu is theiefoie theii fiist choice
when in neeu of infoimation. Bowevei, content in uoogle Scholai is not exhaustive, neithei is the
infoimation pioviueu in WoS. The compaiative stuuies of the content in the uatabases inuicates
that in infoimation liteiacy teaching a thoiough liteiatuie ieseaich neeus to be peifoimeu in
seveial seivices.
kesearch Impact Stud|es
Reseaich impact stuuies aie in this papei unueistoou as measuies baseu on the numbei of
publications anu theii citations. WoS offeis uiffeient measuies of impact, naming the well
known 598$&3 <$&3+- foi jouinals anu the uetaileu 213$31+% 4'8+-3 (Figuie 4) foi paiticulai
seaich iesults, uisplaying total, mean citation counts anu the h-inuex. The lattei has only
iecently got attention, anu is unueistoou as a iobust measuie foi scientific peifoimance. As
uefineu by Biisch (2uuS), "a scientist has inuex h if * of his oi hei papeis have at least *
citations each anu the othei ( ) papeis have < * citations each".


I|gure 4: WoS - C|tat|on keport for Garf|e|d L. 1he h-|ndex |s equa| 33.

uoogle Scholai on the othei siue lists the iesults by ielevance, mainly soiteu by times
citeu (see Box 1). Both seivices keep tiack of uata useable foi scientometiic evaluation anu
ianking. In this section some iesults of compaiative stuuies aie summaiizeu.
Stuuies by Belew (2uuS), Pauly anu Steigiou (2uuS) anu Neho anu Yang (2uu7)
uocument similai citation counts foi aiticles inuexeu in both WoS anu uoogle Scholai. Foi
ianking institutions oi scientists, Neho anu Yang (2uu7) suggest that uata ietiieveu by WoS
!" $%&&%

48
alone is insufficient foi giving an accuiate pictuie of the impact of scientists anu uepenus on the
paiticulai uatabase policy anu uiscipline. Bai-Ilan et al (2uu7) examineu iankings by WoS,
Scopus, anu uoogle Scholai of 22 highly citeu scientists by teims of )8'$-9$%=> 0++3-7,'.
)8'$-9$%=> 0++3-7,' is a measuie foi the ielative ianking of oveilapping items. Biffeiences in
iankings aie summaiizeu anu noimalizeu so that the value 1 ieflects complete equal ianking,
anu the value u complete opposite ianking of two iesult lists. )8'$-9$%=> 0++3-7,'? was
calculateu to u.884 compaiing WoS anu Scopus, u.8Su compaiing WoS anu uoogle Scholai anu
u.78 compaiing Scopus anu uoogle Scholai. Similai iesults aie obtaineu by Nikki (foithcoming).
By applying )8'$-9$%=> 0++3-7,', she founu a value slightly ovei u.8 when compaiing WoS anu
uoogle Scholai. The iesults piove goou agieement in ianking between the uatabases when using
this methou.
Foi calculating impact, Biisch (2uuS) suggests the h-inuex to be a moie significant anu
iobust measuie than the mean citation count. The methou cuts off a long tail iaiely citeu
uocuments, anu it ieuuces the impact of inflateu citation counts of single uocuments. vanclay
(2uu7), Bai-Ilan (2uu8) anu Nikki (foithcoming) investigateu uata ietiieveu by ISI WoS anu
uoogle Scholai anu founu similai values foi the two seivices. Publish anu Peiish (Baizing, No
Bate) is a piogiam which analyzes iesults by uoogle Scholai. It allows uiscaiuing eiioneous
iecoius, anu to some extent hanuling the uata set. 0ne test using the piogiamme "Publish oi
Peiish" (see Figuie S) was caiiieu out seaiching foi the authoi E. uaifielu. This leau to an h-
inuex of S2 aftei cleansing the uata, i.e. S2 of E. uaifielu's publications ieceiveu moie than S2
citations. The coiiesponuing value in WoS was SS (Figuie 4). This single example inuicates that
the h-inuex is a value which ietuins similai iesults ueiiveu by the two seivices. Although, the
aveiageu measuies in the example ietuineu similai iesults, foi single scientists they coulu be
consiueiable uiffeient. 0ne ieason foi this is the publication piactice of the subject uiscipline, as
iepoiteu by Neho anu Yang (2uu7) anu Bai-Ilan (2uu8).


I|gure S: narz|ng's ub||sh or er|sh - C|tat|on metr|cs for L Garf|e|d. Ior the h|ghest ranked records, records be|ong|ng to
kL Garf|e|d are d|scarded (not checked). 1he h-|ndex |s equa| 32.

Although WoS iemains an inuispensable seivice, it may be necessaiy to auuitionally use
uoogle Scholai foi a moie complete analysis of impact measuies. uoogle Scholai samples a
Coogle Scholar compared Lo Web of Sclence. A llLeraLure revlew

49
wiuei iange of publications. Although mainly of lowei quality, it contains books anu pioceeuings
of impoitance which may altei consiueiable citation metiics.
Citation measuies, as all statistics, must be hanuleu caiefully. They may be useful foi
evaluating souices, but have theii limitations. Biilliancy of science is not always ieflecteu by
these measuies. Bowevei, citation uata is easily available anu may be useu foi othei puiposes
foi example foi peifoimance measuies of scientists, anu foi ieciuitment uecisions. Awaieness
about the uata stoieu in the uatabases will contiibute to a ueepei unueistanuing of uiffeient
featuies pioviueu in the seivices. This can also contiibute to the wiuei unueistanuing of
uiffeient infoimation liteiacy aspects. Especially post giauuate stuuents anu auvanceu
ieseaicheis may benefit fiom this competence. They may be enableu to take uecisions in
ielation to choosing publishing channels, wheie visibility of own ieseaich anu getting citeu aie
impoitant aspects. Both highly iankeu jouinals anu open access jouinals oi institutional
iepositoiies aie alteinatives to be awaie of.
Summary
Bue to uatabase venuois, jouinal publisheis anu scholaily societies who pioviue theii content to
uoogle, the amount of qualifieu scholaily content has incieaseu consiueiably in uoogle Scholai
since it was launcheu in 2uu4. It offeis easy, fiee anu fast access to liteiatuie. Togethei with
enhanceu featuies such as expoiting iefeiences, uisplaying citing aiticles anu full text linking,
uoogle Scholai is becoming an impoitant seivice in liteiatuie ieseaich. Bowevei, subsciiption-
baseu scholaily uatabases, such as WoS offei a iichei tool foi auvanceu infoimation ietiieval,
containing iichly stiuctuieu uocuments, which aie seaichable by theii uesciiptois.
Peifoimance measuies baseu on citation uata, seem to be quite similai foi the two
seivices compaieu. Bowevei, citation uata aie in geneial unuei-iepoiteu in WoS anu ovei-
iepoiteu in uoogle Scholai, theiefoie citation uata have to be hanuleu with caution. Foi moie
thoiough analysis, it will be wise to apply uiffeient seivices, WoS foi its guaianteeu pioofeu
scientific content anu contiolleu citation uata, anu uoogle Scholai foi its wiuei collection
incluuing books anu pioceeuings.
Citation seaiching anu ianking by times citeu aie poweiful featuies only pioviueu by a
few seivices. Both WoS anu uoogle Scholai offei these featuies anu both aie multiuisciplinaiy.
Nany subject fielus, as foi example eaith sciences, ieveal a high coveiage with WoS, anu qualify
uoogle Scholai to be an alteinative souice. It offeis a supplementaiy tool foi seaiching anu
locating.
Piemises foi pioviuing a thoiough piogiam foi teaching infoimation liteiacy foi
auvanceu scholais aie to be cuiiently awaie of the uiffeient uatabase policies anu theii
changing featuies. To make use of anu to be ciitical about citation uata anu theii poweiful
potential foi assessing scholaily outcome is ciucial. Evaluating infoimation by ianking may be
one useful appioach to get acquainteu with a subject. In paiticulai unueigiauuate stuuents may
benefit fiom this. Still it shoulu not iemain the only methou. As uiscusseu by Evans (2uu8), it
puts ieseaicheis in touch with pievailing opinions, which may acceleiate consensus anu naiiow
the iange of finuings. Competencies foi ueveloping stiategies foi liteiatuie seaiching iemain
theiefoie impoitant foi all membeis of the acauemic community. Auvanceu seaiching piesumes
uocuments to be iichly stiuctuieu in oiuei to keep contiol anu methouically exploie a subject. It
also piesumes that metauata is maue seaichable. uoogle Scholai anu WoS have veiy uiffeient
policies accoiuing scholaily seaiching. To be awaie of the uiffeiences anu limitations of the
seivices is pait of being infoimation liteiate, anu to be awaie of how implementeu featuies
influence scholaily behavioui is an ethical aspect to be uiscusseu anu taught in infoimation
liteiacy couises.
!" $%&&%

Su
keferences
Association of College anu Reseaich Libiaiies. (2uuu). Infoimation Liteiacy Competency
Stanuaius foi Bighei Euucation. Retiieveu 1S Nay 2uu8, fiom
http:www.ala.oigalaacilacilstanuaiusinfoimationliteiacycompetency.cfm
Bai-Ilan, }. (2uu8). Which h-inuex.A compaiison of WoS, Scopus anu uoogle Scholai.
)&1'%3+9'3-1&>? @A(2), 2S7-271.
Bai-Ilan, }., Levene, N., & Lin, A. (2uu7). Some measuies foi compaiing citation uatabases.
6+7-%$, +0 5%0+-9'3-1&>? B(1), 26-S4.
Bai-Ilan, }. (2uu8). Infoimetiics at the beginning of the 21st centuiy - A ieview. 6+7-%$, +0
5%0+-9'3-1&>? C(1), 1-S2.
Belew, R. K. (2uuS). Scientific impact quantity anu quality: Analysis of two souices of
bibliogiaphic uata. Retiieveu 1S Nay 2uu8, fiom http:aixiv.oigabscsuSu4uS6
Booth, A. (2uu7). Reseaicheis iequiie tailoieu infoimation liteiacy tiaining focusing on
infoimation management, not simply infoimation ietiieval. 4'>'$-&* 5%0+-9$31+%
D'3E+-F. Retiieveu 19 Nay 2uu8, fiom
http:www.iin.ac.ukfilesInfoimation%2uLiteiacy%2uTiaining%2u-
%2uA%2uBooth.uoc
Biewiy, }. N. (2uu7). /++:,' )&*+,$-? G1%"+E> H1#' !&$"'91& )'$-&* $%" I';+%"J ! >37"; +0 %'E
3++,> $%" &*$%:1%: *$I13> 1% !4H ,1I-$-1'>K Retiieveu 11 }uly 2uu8, fiom
http:hul.hanule.net19u1429
Evans, }. A. (2uu8). Electionic publication anu the naiiowing of science anu scholaiship. )&1'%&'?
LCB(S887), S9S-S99.
uaifielu, E. (19SS). Citation Inuexes foi Science - New uimension in uocumentation thiough
association of iueas )&1'%&'? BCC(S1S9), 1u8-111.
uaifielu, E. (199u). Bow ISI selects jouinals foi coveiage - Quantitative anu qualitative
consiueiations. 27--'%3 2+%3'%3>? CC, S-1S.
uoogle Scholai. (No Bate). About uoogle Scholai. Retiieveu 11 }uly 2uu8, fiom
http:scholai.google.comintlenscholaiabout.html
Baglunu, L., & 0lsson, P. (2uu8). The Impact on 0niveisity Libiaiies of Changes in Infoimation
Behavioi Among Acauemic Reseaicheis: A Nultiple Case Stuuy. M*' 6+7-%$, +0 !&$"'91&
H1I-$-1$%>*18? LA(1), S2-S9.
Baizing, A. W. (No Bate). Baizing's Publish oi Peiish. Retiieveu 14 August 2uu8, fiom
http:www.haizing.com
Baya, u., Nygien, E., & Wiumaik, W. (2uu7). Netalib anu uoogle Scholai: a usei stuuy. N%,1%'
5%0+-9$31+% 4'#1'E? LB(S), S6S-S7S.
Biisch, }. E. (2uuS). An inuex to quantify an inuiviuual's scientific ieseaich output. O-+&''"1%:> +0
3*' D$31+%$, !&$"'9; +0 )&1'%&'>? BPC(46), 16S69-16S72.
ISI WoS. Thomson Scientific. (No Bate). Web of Science. Retiieveu 11 }uly 2uu8, fiom
http:scientific.thomsonieuteis.compiouuctswos
Coogle Scholar compared Lo Web of Sclence. A llLeraLure revlew

S1
}acso, P. (2uuS). As we may seaich. Compaiison of majoi featuies of the Web of Science, Scopus,
anu uoogle Scholai citation-baseu anu citation-enhanceu uatabases. 27--'%3 )&1'%&'?
QR(9), 1SS7-1S47.
}acso, P. (2uu6). Beflateu, inflateu anu phantom citation counts. N%,1%' 5%0+-9$31+% 4'#1'E?
LP(S), 297-Su9.
}acso, P. (2uu8). uoogle Scholai ievisiteu. N%,1%' 5%0+-9$31+% 4'#1'E? LC(1), 1u2-114.
Neho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2uu7). Impact of uata souices on citation counts anu iankings of LIS
faculty: Web of Science veisus Scopus anu uoogle Scholai. 6+7-%$, +0 3*' !9'-1&$%
)+&1'3; 0+- 5%0+-9$31+% )&1'%&' $%" M'&*%+,+:;? SQ(1S), 21uS-212S.
Nikki, S. (foithcoming). Compaiing uoogle Scholai anu ISI WoS foi Eaith Liteiatuie. !&&'83'" I;
)&1'%3+9'3-1&>.
Neuhaus, C., Neuhaus, E., Ashei, A., & Wieue, C. (2uu6). The Bepth anu Bieauth of uoogle
Scholai: An Empiiical Stuuy. 8+-3$,J H1I-$-1'> $%" 3*' !&$"'9;? T(2), 127-141.
Noiuzi, A. (2uuS). uoogle Scholai: The new geneiation of citation inuexes. H1I-1? SS, 17u-18u.
0'Leaiy, N. (2uuS). uoogle Scholai: What's in it foi You. 5%0+-9$31+% M+"$;? CC(7), SS-S9.
Pauly, B., & Steigiou, K. I. (2uuS). Equivalence of iesults fiom two citation analyses: Thomson
ISI's citation inuex anu uoogle's scholai seivice. .3*1&> 1% )&1'%&' $%" .%#1-+%9'%3$,
O+,131&>? SS-SS.
vanclay, }. K. (2uu7). 0n the iobustness of the h-inuex. 6+7-%$, +0 3*' !9'-1&$% )+&1'3; 0+-
5%0+-9$31+% )&1'%&' $%" M'&*%+,+:;? SQ(1u), 1S47-1SSu.
Walteis, W. B. (2uu7). uoogle Scholai coveiage of a multiuisciplinaiy fielu. 5%0+-9$31+%
O-+&'>>1%: $%" U$%$:'9'%3? AL(4), 1121-11S2.
Webb, }., uannon-Leaiy, P., & Bent, N. (2uu7). O-+#1"1%: '00'&31#' ,1I-$-; >'-#1&'> 0+- -'>'$-&*.
Lonuon: Facet Publ.