IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v59y2008i10p1570-1581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intradisciplinary differences in database coverage and the consequences for bibliometric research

Author

Listed:
  • Tove Faber Frandsen
  • Jeppe Nicolaisen

Abstract

Bibliographic databases (including databases based on open access) are routinely used for bibliometric research. The value of a specific database depends to a large extent on the coverage of the discipline(s) under study. A number of studies have determined the coverage of databases in specific disciplines focusing on interdisciplinary differences; however, little is known about the potential existence of intradisciplinary differences in database coverage. Focusing on intradisciplinary differences, the article documents large database‐coverage differences within two disciplines (economics and psychology). The point extends to include both the uneven coverage of specialties and research traditions. The implications for bibliometric research are discussed, and precautions which need to be taken are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • Tove Faber Frandsen & Jeppe Nicolaisen, 2008. "Intradisciplinary differences in database coverage and the consequences for bibliometric research," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(10), pages 1570-1581, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:59:y:2008:i:10:p:1570-1581
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.20817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20817
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.20817?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicolaisen, Jeppe & Frandsen, Tove Faber, 2012. "Consensus formation in science modeled by aggregated bibliographic coupling," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 276-284.
    2. García-Pérez, Miguel A., 2011. "Strange attractors in the Web of Science database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 214-218.
    3. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2175-2188, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:59:y:2008:i:10:p:1570-1581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.