书目数据库视野下的大学--Google Scholar、Scopus和Web of Science的回溯成长比较
Universities through the Eyes of Bibliographic Databases: A Retroactive Growth Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
摘要：
本研究的目的是确定GS的网址为基础的方法作为一个有效的近似大学的学术产出措施，考虑到三个方面（追溯性增长，相关性和覆盖面）的适用性。为此，选择了100所土耳其大学作为案例研究。Web of Science（WoS）、Scopus和GS（2000年至2013年）的生产力是在两次不同的测量迭代（2014年和2018年）中获得的。此外，从WoS中检索了14所研究型大学的子集共18，174份文件，验证了它们在GS中的存在。研究结果表明，GS的追溯性增长是不可预测的，并依赖于每所大学，使这一参数难以在机构层面进行评估。另外，GS（基于URL的方法）与WoS和Scopus（选定的来源）之间的生产率相关性是适度的，尽管它取决于大学，出版年份和测量年份。最后，在分析的18，174篇文章中，只有16%在大学官方网站上被索引，尽管高达84%在其他GS来源中被索引。这项工作证明，基于URL的方法来计算机构的生产力在GS是不是一个很好的代理在WoS和Scopus索引的出版物的总数，至少在国家的情况下分析。然而，主要原因并非与全球服务的运作有直接关系，而是与大学缺乏对开放获取的承诺有关。
英文摘要：
The purpose of this study is to ascertain the suitability of GS's url-based method as a valid approximation of universities' academic output measures, taking into account three aspects (retroactive growth, correlation, and coverage). To do this, a set of 100 Turkish universities were selected as a case study. The productivity in Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and GS (2000 to 2013) were captured in two different measurement iterations (2014 and 2018). In addition, a total of 18,174 documents published by a subset of 14 research-focused universities were retrieved from WoS, verifying their presence in GS within the official university web domain. Findings suggest that the retroactive growth in GS is unpredictable and dependent on each university, making this parameter hard to evaluate at the institutional level. Otherwise, the correlation of productivity between GS (url-based method) and WoS and Scopus (selected sources) is moderately positive, even though it varies depending on the university, the year of publication, and the year of measurement. Finally, only 16% out of 18,174 articles analyzed were indexed in the official university website, although up to 84% were indexed in other GS sources. This work proves that the url-based method to calculate institutional productivity in GS is not a good proxy for the total number of publications indexed in WoS and Scopus, at least in the national context analyzed. However, the main reason is not directly related to the operation of GS, but with a lack of universities' commitment to open access.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
