Effectiveness of OpenAIRE, BASE, Recolecta, and Google Scholar at finding spanish articles in repositories

Abad-García, María-Francisca; González‐Teruel, Aurora; Gonzalez-Llinares, Javier

doi:10.1002/asi.23975

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some scientometric studies have used document type as a variable. Consequently, some researchers have focused exclusively on journal articles [ 3 , 6 , 29 , 30 , 47 , 48 ], whereas others have presented their collected citations per document type, including journal articles, books, book chapters, and conference proceedings [ 25 ]. Furthermore, “grey literature” [ 4 ], such as theses and research reports [ 18 ], can also be included.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Soon after its creation in 2004, GS received major criticism [ 1 ], but subsequently, further studies described it more positively [ 2 , 3 ]. Indeed, the literature acknowledges the free access offered by GS [ 3 - 5 ] and the quality of its coverage [ 6 - 12 ]. The coverage of GS is considered better than that of both Web of Science (WoS) [ 12 - 15 ] and Scopus [ 9 , 10 ], which are GS’s fee-based competitors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most researchers generally claim that these errors are negligible [ 9 , 10 , 12 , 20 , 22 - 24 ], whereas others consider that data cleaning is necessary [ 16 , 19 , 25 ] but laborious [ 4 , 21 ]. Thus, some scholars have used GS without data cleaning [ 2 , 6 , 11 , 14 , 26 , 27 ], while others have identified and removed duplicates [ 4 , 9 , 12 , 17 - 19 , 24 , 28 , 29 ]. This removal was performed in 23 of 36 studies (41.8%) using GS data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Types of Errors Hiding in Google Scholar Data

Sauvayre¹

2022

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Google Scholar (GS) is a free tool that may be used by researchers to analyze citations; find appropriate literature; or evaluate the quality of an author or a contender for tenure, promotion, a faculty position, funding, or research grants. GS has become a major bibliographic and citation database. For assessing the literature, databases, such as PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science, can be used in place of GS because they are more reliable. The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of citation data collected from GS and provide a comprehensive description of the errors and miscounts identified. For this purpose, 281 documents that cited 2 specific works were retrieved via Publish or Perish software (PoP) and were examined. This work studied the false-positive issue inherent in the analysis of neuroimaging data. The results revealed an unprecedented error rate, with 279 of 281 (99.3%) examined references containing at least one error. Nonacademic documents tended to contain more errors than academic publications (U=5117.0; P<.001). This viewpoint article, based on a case study examining GS data accuracy, shows that GS data not only fail to be accurate but also potentially expose researchers, who would use these data without verification, to substantial biases in their analyses and results. Further work must be conducted to assess the consequences of using GS data extracted by PoP.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Types of Errors Hiding in Google Scholar Data

Sauvayre¹

2022

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Harzing & van der Wal, 2008 ; Ştirbu et al , 2015 ). Research has been conducted also to compare GS with open access repositories such as OpenAire and others ( Abad-Garcia et al , 2018 ). Generally, there is no consensus on whether GS is a valid alternative to scholarly citation databases.…”

Section: Why Google Scholar Is Not a Complete Discovery Platformmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining discovery: Is Google Scholar a discovery platform? An essay on the need for a new approach to scholarly discovery

Achenbach¹,

Błaszczyńska²,

Paoli³

et al. 2022

Open Res Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay discusses the concept of discovery, intended as content discovery, and defines it in the new context of Open Science, with a focus on Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH). Starting from the example of Google Scholar, the authors show that this well established service does not address the current needs, practices, and variety of discovery. Alternatives in terms of technical choices, features, and governance, do however exist, offering richer and more open discovery. The paper presents in particular the implementations and research work of the H2020 project TRIPLE (Transforming Research through Innovative Practices for Linked Interdisciplinary Exploration). Dedicated to the building of a discovery platform for the SSH, the project is meant to address the specificities and evolution of discovery in this field. Prevailing scholarly resource platforms like Google Scholar limit discovery by focussing only on publications, and favouring through their algorithm well-cited papers, English content, and discipline-specific resources. A limitation in the context of cross-disciplinary and collaborative Open Science, such a service more specifically hinders discovery in the SSH. Characterized by a fragmented landscape, a variety of languages, data types, and outputs, research in the SSH requires services that fully exploit discovery potentialities. Moreover, a survey conducted within the TRIPLE project showed that most SSH researchers use Google Scholar as their starting point, and that they recognise the lack of control they have with this system. Beyond the extension of features and content, transparency is the other important criterion for the building of an Open Infrastructure actually serving the research community. In light of this, we present in some detail the GoTriple platform, which exploits today’s technological potential and incorporates the best known functionalities in order to unveil more and innovative scholarly outputs and lead to international and interdisciplinary research project collaborations.

show abstract

“…The author found that just 11.1% of the articles analysed were archived in the researchers’ institutional repositories, while 54.8% were available on ResearchGate. In another vein, Abad-García et al [21] analysed 762 articles resulting from projects financed by the FIS-2012 of the Carlos III Health Institute with a view to studying the use of OpenAIRE, BASE, RECOLECTA and Google Scholar for depositing copies of articles that should be available in open access.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access availability of Catalonia research output: Case analysis of the CERCA institution, 2011-2015

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The open access availability of publications by Catalonia’s CERCA research centres was analysed to determine the extent to which authors use open access journals, repositories, social networks and other websites to disseminate their research results. A sample of 3,730 journal articles published by authors from CERCA research centres between 2011 and 2015 and available on Web of Science (out of a total output of 44,423) was analysed to identify how many were available in open access, full-text format. The results revealed that 75,8% of the total (2,828 articles) had at least one version available in open access, but just 52% (1,940 articles) had at least one version available in either journals (whether pure or hybrid open access journals or those with embargo periods) or repositories, a finding that highlights the powerful role played by academic social networks in the sharp increase in open access availability. Of the 2,828 articles for which at least one open access version was found, a total of 9,868 copies were located. With respect to versions, the publisher’s final version, i.e. the type formatted for publication by journal publishers, was found in 75,3% of cases. The number of articles published in open access journals (567) was very close to the number of articles published in hybrid journals or journals with embargo periods (624). Only 40,4% of the articles in the sample were located in repositories, being the subject repositories the heaviest used. Fifty percent of the articles (1,881 publications) were posted on academic social networks, the most popular of which were ResearchGate and Academia. According to thematic areas, all six areas (science, life sciences, medical and health sciences, engineering and architecture and humanities) exceeded 70% of articles in open access.

show abstract

Effectiveness of OpenAIRE, BASE, Recolecta, and Google Scholar at finding spanish articles in repositories

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

Types of Errors Hiding in Google Scholar Data

Types of Errors Hiding in Google Scholar Data

Defining discovery: Is Google Scholar a discovery platform? An essay on the need for a new approach to scholarly discovery

Open access availability of Catalonia research output: Case analysis of the CERCA institution, 2011-2015

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About