Page 1
Scopus and I
Using large information and Using large information and citation databases for citation databases for
evaluationevaluation
Tefko Saracevic, PhDSchool of Communication, Information and Library StudiesRutgers University, [email protected] ://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~tefko
Page 2
© Tefko Saracevic 2Scopus and I
Full disclosureFull disclosure• I have no connection with Scopus
– But: I am on Scopus Advisory Board & as such have a free password
– but I have Scopus access through Rutgers University Library and as Elsevier journal editor
• I participated so far at one Scopus Advisory Board meeting (Budapest) and evaluated their product informally over phone conversations
• I gave an informal talk about using Scopus at 2006 American Library Association meeting & at Rutgers
• I have no connection with Scopus– But: I am on Scopus Advisory Board & as such
have a free password– but I have Scopus access through Rutgers University Library
and as Elsevier journal editor
• I participated so far at one Scopus Advisory Board meeting (Budapest) and evaluated their product informally over phone conversations
• I gave an informal talk about using Scopus at 2006 American Library Association meeting & at Rutgers
Page 3
© Tefko Saracevic 3Scopus and I
What you can’t find on ScopusWhat you can’t find on Scopus
Named after:
Chiffchaff
(Phylloscopus Collybita)
a small bird with great navigational skills
Page 4
© Tefko Saracevic 4Scopus and I
Page 5
© Tefko Saracevic 5Scopus and I
Definition of the central themeDefinition of the central theme
to evaluate (verb)to consider or examine something in order
to judge its value, quality, importance, extent, condition, or performance
to evaluate (verb)to consider or examine something in order
to judge its value, quality, importance, extent, condition, or performance
Page 6
© Tefko Saracevic 6Scopus and I
However …However …
• Evaluation has many components and should use a number of sources
• Information & citation databases are a powerful source & tool, but one among a number of others
• Very useful• But use with skill & caution!
• Evaluation has many components and should use a number of sources
• Information & citation databases are a powerful source & tool, but one among a number of others
• Very useful• But use with skill & caution!
Page 7
© Tefko Saracevic 7Scopus and I
Overview of Scopus
Elsevier effort to get into searching & combining ScienceDirect & Scirus (web searching)
Massive effort & outlay; big marketing development investment HUGE & undisclosed
Headed by Eefka Smit & a young, mostly Dutch team global operations:
Headquarters: Amsterdam; marketing: global; indexing: Philippines; computers: Dayton, Ohio, USA
Unveiled in 2004 new features unveiled constantly – innovative
e.g. mid 2005: added RefWorks; end 2005 Citation tracking; 2006 Author profiling & further analysis tools
Search engine licensed from Fast
Page 8
© Tefko Saracevic 8Scopus and I
Coverage Science & technology only, no (or little)
humanities includes Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Engineering, Life
and Health Sciences, Social Sciences, Psychology, Economics, Biological, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Covers some 15,000 journals, 700 proceedings, 600 trade publications, 125 book series, 12.5 mill. patents
Incorporates wall to wall Medline, Embase, Compendex, & many other databases
Page 9
© Tefko Saracevic 9Scopus and I
Coverage … Time covered:
Abstracts go back to 1966 References go back to 1996
While having gaps, coverage seems more comprehensive than any other single database
Also incorporates web search via Scirus 200 mill. web sources
Also strong in non-English & developing country sources More than 60% of titles are from countries other than
the US
Page 10
© Tefko Saracevic 10Scopus and I
Overview of other databases- for a few comparisons
Web of Science (WoS) Coverage: science, technology, humanities origin in three citation databases
Science Citation Index (SCI), Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI)
at Rutgers coverage only 1994-present - pricing reason - with some 8,000 journals, plus patents & other databases – only this accessible to me
DIALOG a very large supermarket – some 900 databases (db) in every
field and area, including citation indexes Citation db coverage: SCI 1974- ; SSCI 1972 -; A&H, 1980-
all accessible to me
Page 11
© Tefko Saracevic 11Scopus and I
Reviews
Comparing Scopus and Web of Science 2005: http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43 2006: http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43
critical of Scopus gaps in coverage, particularly before 1996
but not clear why comparison of these two services Scopus does many different things that WoS does not &
vice versa both have citation searching but Scopus has much more Scopus subject searching is much more comprehensive,
WoS citation searching is more comprehensive, but Scopus citation tracking more usable for evaluation
Page 12
© Tefko Saracevic 12Scopus and I
What can you do?
Subjects search with many capabilities to limit & modify, rank
Source search – journals, types of sources Author search with many extensions
– e.g. as to citations to and from Citation tracking Integrated with getting full texts with library Integrated with RefWorks, given library has it Integrated web search
Page 13
© Tefko Saracevic 13Scopus and I
What do I do? Use it as in a variety of roles &
evaluations, as a: researcher teacher journal editor mentor promotion, tenure, committee member;
administrator tool for keeping current; also:
for finding what and who did I miss who is leading an area
concentrate here
with implications
Page 14
© Tefko Saracevic 14Scopus and I
What do you see?
At first: Lots of features laid out all at once But, relatively clear interface laying out
capabilities Geared toward fast, intuitive learning & use
and indeed it is relatively easy to learn & use Results displayed in Last In First Out (LIFO)
order, but can be ranked or listed in various ways
Page 15
© Tefko Saracevic 15Scopus and I
But lets get going ….
Live examples from
http://www.scopus.com/user: tsaracevic
password: I am not telling
or:
http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/
Page 16
© Tefko Saracevic 16Scopus and I
Starting …
search options
Page 17
© Tefko Saracevic 17Scopus and I
Use in research and citation tracking
Presently, I have completed but am updating & re-writing a comprehensive review about the notion of relevance in information science
For that: I did subject searching & identified & evaluated areas
of research I also searched for some key authors and did citation
tracking & evaluated contributions & trends including, of course, a vanity search
then I saved each author or subject search in a list
Page 18
© Tefko Saracevic 18Scopus and I
Fun part
Had fun tracking those that cited them that cited them …
Eventually got lost in the tracking maze – of course!
Well, lets take a look
Page 19
© Tefko Saracevic 19Scopus and I
Subject searchsearch selections
Page 20
© Tefko Saracevic 20Scopus and I
Search results
I found 66 articles about “relevance AND judgment” then saved them in My List, so I can evaluate, use and
update them later then I found all the citations to the 66 articles
Here is the results page And then two author examples…
Page 21
© Tefko Saracevic 21Scopus and I
Searchresults
Using options after I got the results
Page 22
© Tefko Saracevic 22Scopus and I
Following a single author & article
Selected one of the most cited articles: Saved in list as “Voorhees 2000” and did citation
tracking: who cited it? it was cited 28 times (“Voorhees children”) then I went on and found 102 articles that cited
Voorhees children (“Voorhees grandchildren”) this way I evaluated impact of an article and spread
into various publications and areas Well, lets take a look
Page 23
© Tefko Saracevic 23Scopus and I
Selected articlevarious features
Page 24
© Tefko Saracevic 24Scopus and I
My 11 saved lists
after searching& citation tracking I create lists
Page 25
© Tefko Saracevic 25Scopus and I
Voorhees 2000 I saved in my lists various features
Page 26
© Tefko Saracevic 26Scopus and I
28 Voorheeschildren
various features
Page 27
© Tefko Saracevic 27Scopus and I
102 Voorheesgrandchildren
various features
Page 28
© Tefko Saracevic 28Scopus and I
then…
I selected and viewed the list “Mizzaro citations” to work on them further
selected them all clicked on citation tracking and voila!
Page 29
© Tefko Saracevic 29Scopus and I
Selected them all for citation overview
Page 30
© Tefko Saracevic 30Scopus and I
Interested in this
one
Page 31
© Tefko Saracevic 31Scopus and I
Follow-up on four articles;
Tombros was NEW for me!
Page 32
© Tefko Saracevic 32Scopus and I
Following a vanity but useful trail
Created a similar list of my own articles Selected one on interaction & relevance Who cited it? Who cited them who cited me? Discovered a number of previously unknown
articles Well, lets take a look
Page 33
© Tefko Saracevic 33Scopus and I
Author selection &disambiguation
List of all 20 authors last name “Saracevic “–
first page
Choice
Page 34
© Tefko Saracevic 34Scopus and I
Author selection &disambiguation
List of all 20 authors last name “Saracevic “–
second page
Choices
List of all 5 “Saracevic, T” – all me
Page 35
© Tefko Saracevic 35Scopus and I
Scopus & I: without self-citations
This one
No. of articles in Scopus No. of citations
in Scopus
Page 36
© Tefko Saracevic 36Scopus and I
Scopus & I: with self-citations
No. of all citations in Scopus
977 all
-950 without
27 self
Page 37
© Tefko Saracevic 37Scopus and I
Web of Science (WoS)
Same subject search “relevance AND judgment”
Same vanity search Reminder: My access to WoS through Rutgers
limited to 1994 – present Well, lets take a look
Page 38
© Tefko Saracevic 38Scopus and I
WoS: subject search
search selections
Page 39
© Tefko Saracevic 39Scopus and I
WoS: subject search results
search results
Page 40
© Tefko Saracevic 40Scopus and I
WoS and I: my articles
No. of articles in WoS
analysis features
Page 41
© Tefko Saracevic 41Scopus and I
WoS and I: authors citing meN
o. o
f all
cita
tions
in W
oS
Author citing me most
Self citations
Page 42
© Tefko Saracevic 42Scopus and I
WoS and I: my citations
No. of all citations in WoS
analysis features
Page 43
© Tefko Saracevic 43Scopus and I
Dialog
Same vanity search Reminder: My access to Dialog databases
includes whatever years they have: Citation db coverage: SCI 1974- ; SSCI 1972 -; A&H, 1980-
Dialogweb I use is a command search powerful but not intuitive at all needs training or information professional
Well, lets take a look
Page 44
© Tefko Saracevic 44Scopus and I
Dialog and I: my citations
List of databases being searched
search command: expand on authors named “saracevic”
Page 45
© Tefko Saracevic 45Scopus and I
Dialog and I: search process
commands complex, thus screens not shown, except the final result screen
Briefly: found my articles in all 4 databases (126 articles) some articles are in more than one db, thus removed
duplicates (102 unique articles remained) found citations to me in all db (1513 citations) some citations are in more than one db, thus removed
duplicates (1084 unique citations remained, but include self citations) finally, eliminated self citations (1042 citations without self
citations)
Page 46
© Tefko Saracevic 46Scopus and I
Dialog and I: search process
S1: no. of articlesin those db
S4: no. of citationsafter removing duplicates
S3: no. of citationsin those db
S2: no. of articlesafter removing duplicates
S5: no. of citationsafter removing self citations
Page 47
© Tefko Saracevic 47Scopus and I
Comparisons of my articles & citations
Scopus(1996-
WoS(1994-
Dialog (1972 -
No. of articles 53 31 102
Total no. of citations
Citations excluding self citations
977
950
822
803
1082
1042
Page 48
© Tefko Saracevic 48Scopus and I
Tracking a single article
Barry C.L., Schamber L. (1998) Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A cross-situational comparison Information Processing and Management, 34(2-3), 219-236
Tracked citations in Scopus And in Web of Science
Page 49
© Tefko Saracevic 49Scopus and I
Cited 33 times in Scopus
I followed up on the citations – cited even in: Evaluating research for use in practice: What criteria do specialist nurses use? Journal of Advanced Nursing 50 (3), pp. 235-243
Page 50
© Tefko Saracevic 50Scopus and I
and the winner is?
For Barry & Schamber 1998 article: Scopus: 34 citations Web of Science: 31 citations
Oh well … Were they the same articles? Degree of overlap?
Overlap: 27 documents (both in Scopus & WoS) Scopus had 7 that WoS did not WoS had 4 that Scopus did not
Scopus 34
WoS 31
277 4
Page 51
© Tefko Saracevic 51Scopus and I
Tracking one of my own articles
Spink, A., Saracevic, T. (1997).
Interaction in information retrieval: Selection and effectiveness of search terms.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(8), 741-761
Again: Tracked citations in Scopus And in Web of Science
Page 52
© Tefko Saracevic 52Scopus and I
and the winner is?
For Spink & Saracevic 1997 article: Scopus: 43 citations Web of Science: 40 citations
Oh well … Were they the same articles? Degree of overlap?
Overlap: 31 documents (both in Scopus & WoS) Scopus had 12 that WoS did not WoS had 9 that Scopus did not
Scopus 43
WoS 40
3112 9
Page 53
© Tefko Saracevic 53Scopus and I
To my surprise…
For my article I followed a bit on unique citations in each, Scopus and WoS: WoS had one article that did not cite the original at all WoS did not have five citations from JASIST – it had
other citations from that journal – these were in Scopus
Scopus did not have one citation from Inf Processing & Management and three citations from JASIST, it had other citations from those journals – these were in WoS
Oh well…
Page 54
© Tefko Saracevic 54Scopus and I
Editorial usesEditorial uses
• I use citation tracking as editor of the journal Information Processing & Management:
– find [good] referees – most important function for any editor• who did what in this area/topic, how cited
– subject layout of the topic of the paper– tracking of author’s own work– self-plagiarism?
• I use citation tracking as editor of the journal Information Processing & Management:
– find [good] referees – most important function for any editor• who did what in this area/topic, how cited
– subject layout of the topic of the paper– tracking of author’s own work– self-plagiarism?
Page 55
© Tefko Saracevic 55Scopus and I
Inviting refereeseditorial page for
inviting referees
gets me right into Scopus
Page 56
© Tefko Saracevic 56Scopus and I
For this particular paper in Scopus
I went to author search for first author he was over time at two instituions published 7 papers, two on data fusion, but different
topics was cited only twice, thus no use following citation
tracking Then I did a subject search “data fusion AND
information retrieval” since 2004 found authors that were cited a few times on the topic invited two to be referees
Page 57
© Tefko Saracevic 57Scopus and I
Citation versus subject searching
Each follows a different path for retrieval Studies show that each retrieves different documents
low overlap between what is retrieved As a rule, when doing serious searching and
evaluation I do both popular engines e.g. Google are useless for this
Citation searching/tracking also serves different purposes mapping of an area/topic and author also used fofr assessing impact
Page 58
© Tefko Saracevic 58Scopus and I
My preference:
Scopus easy & fast to use comprehensive many very useful features combination of several modes of searching
use depending on need and task useful for various evaluations has holes, but EVERY database has them, Scopus
has fewer ones helpful people around, easy to reach & communicate
Page 59
© Tefko Saracevic 59Scopus and I
What is not in Scopus but I would LOVE it
Graphical display of connections add visualization, network maps
Longer years back Web of Science also has limitation on years depending on
subscription rate going back from 1994 costs gazillion dollars – Rutgers does not have it
Massive checking & corrections as needed check on what is missing in issues & adding check on citations and adding missed or deleting wrong
ones How about adding humanities?
Page 60
© Tefko Saracevic 60Scopus and I
ConclusionsConclusions
• Actually, I do not have any• But subject & author searching &
citation tracking beside being serious business and useful for evaluation is also fun!
• So have fun!
• Actually, I do not have any• But subject & author searching &
citation tracking beside being serious business and useful for evaluation is also fun!
• So have fun!
Page 61
© Tefko Saracevic 61Scopus and I