Repositorio Institucional
Repositorio Institucional
CONICET Digital
  • Inicio
  • EXPLORAR
    • AUTORES
    • DISCIPLINAS
    • COMUNIDADES
  • Estadísticas
  • Novedades
    • Noticias
    • Boletines
  • Ayuda
    • General
    • Datos de investigación
  • Acerca de
    • CONICET Digital
    • Equipo
    • Red Federal
  • Contacto
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
  • INFORMACIÓN GENERAL
  • RESUMEN
  • ESTADISTICAS
 
Artículo

A comparison of three main scientific literature databases using a search in aquatic ecology

Ferreira, Victor G.; Rosa, Jonathan; Almeida, Nadiny M.; Pereira, Julia S.; Sabater, Lara MilenaIcon ; Vendramin, Daiane; Zhu, Hong; Martens, Koen; Higuti, Janet
Fecha de publicación: 03/2023
Editorial: Springer
Revista: Hydrobiologia
ISSN: 0018-8158
Idioma: Inglés
Tipo de recurso: Artículo publicado
Clasificación temática:
Ecología

Resumen

Online searches for relevant scientific references using keywords have become common practice. Several multidisciplinary scientific online databases are available, of which Web of Science, Scopus (both payable) and Google Scholar (free of charge) are the most commonly used. We test the hypothesis that results of highly similar searches in these three databases do not necessarily give comparable results. We set out to query the three databases with a real example on “diapause in microcrustaceans” (Cladocera, Copepoda and Ostracoda), using the same time period (2012–2021), the same keywords with the same syntaxis and the same sorting criterion (“relevance”), and compared the first 100 hits provided by each database. There were several references provided which were irrelevant to the search, especially in the Web of Science, and of the remaining relevant references, only 9.84% were provided by all three databases. Our survey showed significant differences amongst the results provided by the databases, especially for “hydroperiod” and “type of environment”. These differences can be the result of different coverage of the scientific literature by the databases, but also of the different ways by which the criterion “relevance” is calculated by the three algorithms. We, therefore, recommend that literature surveys must be based on several databases; otherwise, the results might become biased.
Palabras clave: GOOGLE SCHOLAR , MICROCRUSTACEANS , RESTING EGGS , SCOPUS , WEB OF SCIENCE
Ver el registro completo
 
Archivos asociados
Tamaño: 870.3Kb
Formato: PDF
.
Solicitar
Licencia
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess Excepto donde se diga explícitamente, este item se publica bajo la siguiente descripción: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5)
Identificadores
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11336/248271
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10750-022-05067-5
Colecciones
Articulos(CECOAL)
Articulos de CENTRO DE ECOLOGIA APLICADA DEL LITORAL (I)
Citación
Ferreira, Victor G.; Rosa, Jonathan; Almeida, Nadiny M.; Pereira, Julia S.; Sabater, Lara Milena; et al.; A comparison of three main scientific literature databases using a search in aquatic ecology; Springer; Hydrobiologia; 850; 6; 3-2023; 1477-1486
Compartir
Altmétricas
 

Enviar por e-mail
Separar cada destinatario (hasta 5) con punto y coma.
  • Facebook
  • X Conicet Digital
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Sound Cloud
  • LinkedIn

Los contenidos del CONICET están licenciados bajo Creative Commons Reconocimiento 2.5 Argentina License

https://www.conicet.gov.ar/ - CONICET

Inicio

Explorar

  • Autores
  • Disciplinas
  • Comunidades

Estadísticas

Novedades

  • Noticias
  • Boletines

Ayuda

Acerca de

  • CONICET Digital
  • Equipo
  • Red Federal

Contacto

Godoy Cruz 2290 (C1425FQB) CABA – República Argentina – Tel: +5411 4899-5400 repositorio@conicet.gov.ar
TÉRMINOS Y CONDICIONES