I believe that Google Scholar is the most popular academic indexing way for researchers and citations. However, some other indexing institutions may be more professional than Google Scholar but not as popular as Google Scholar. Other indexing websites like Scopus and Clarivate are providing more statistical figures for scholars, institutions or even journals. On account of publication citations, always Google Scholar shows higher citations for a paper than other indexing websites since Google Scholar consider most of the publication platforms so he can easily count the citations. While other databases just consider the citations come from those journals that are already indexed in their database.
Scopus index is a better one.
Therefore, the universities depend on it to evaluate for the researchers because not controlled by researchers such as Google Scholar. In Google Scholar, the papers could be added because of the similarity of researchers' names or researchers could add unrelated papers (this is a moral crime).
Yes, Google Scholar is very popular. However, I am asking myself: should I rely on an index of Google, a commercial company, that indexes a scientific impact? It is weird. Nevertheless, besides citations, the index can rely on the readership, for example, number of downloads from Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia.edu or other sources.
To assess a researcher (I copied it from the MSCA application template):
- Publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, peer-reviewed conference proceedings and/or monographs of their respective research fields, indicating also the number of citations (excluding self-citations) they have attracted.
- Granted patent(s).
- Research monographs, chapters in collective volumes and any translations thereof.
- Invited presentations to peer-reviewed, internationally established conferences and/or international advanced schools.
- Research expeditions led by the experienced researcher.
- Organisation of International conferences in your field(s) of research, including membership in the steering and/or programme committee.
- Examples of participation in industrial innovation.
- Prizes and Awards.
- Funding received so far.
- Supervising and mentoring activities.
LIke it or not, Google Scholar has the widest spread of disciplines and papers. They make their money from adverts on Google proper, YouTube etc., not from pushing their own parochial press, like the others. Support Scholar!
All of these index services use different criteria ... & all are sigificant for different reasons. As with university ranking indices there are various versions & new indices such as EFI emerging. The turbulence in the system due to open access & new publishing opportunities will continue to challenge the established ‘old world’ of elitist journals & publishers dominating the system. But this challenge is messy & includes predatory journal publishers. Lots of things to weigh up ... e.g., so called ‘impact factor’ vs exposure & citation counts.
Scopus index is the most professional one, especially if it involves peer reviewed research papers. But, Google Scholar is the most popular. Most research institutions require postgraduate students to have Scopus indexed papers as requirements for graduation. But for personal assessment, I think Google Scholar is OK.
Google Scholar counts citation, while Scopus is the main database for the indexation of scientific publications recognized by many science centers and universities in different countries. There are many other indexing databases but usually specialized for specific types of scientific publications and specific types of additional information about the authors of these publications. Publication database and authors of publications and additional information Research Gate is a unique database enabling networking and building international research teams. I invite you to the discussion
Scopus index is a better one.
Therefore, the universities depend on it to evaluate for the researchers because not controlled by researchers such as Google Scholar. In Google Scholar, the papers could be added because of the similarity of researchers' names or researchers could add unrelated papers (this is a moral crime).
Scopus index is abetter one. Therefore, the universities depend on it to evaluate for the researchersbecause not controlled by researchers such as Google Scholar
I strongly support that each indexing platform is beneficial than others in a certain period of the researcher life. In the beginning, Google Scholar might be more beneficial for junior researchers who just started their research work in which they can use it to search for prior work and for citation purposes. Thereafter, Scopus could be more beneficial in an advanced stage, once they become teachers and professors where it can be usefully used in other official academic purposes.
Scopus
Google scolar puede ser util en términos de popularidad, sin embargo para la evaluación científica Scopus es el mejor
This is my answer to other question (with little bit other conclusion):
There is a fundamental difference between these indicators. Google takes into account all citations from articles available online (including RG ones). RG shows only citations from articles posted on RG. Scopus counts only citations from Scopus journals, on articles in Scopus journals. WOS operates similarly, but on a somewhat narrower base. There are also national citation systems (NCS, for example, in Russia - RSCI (RINTc)), these often take into account citations from the "gerald-of-university-of-rotten-borough" on articles in "gerald-of-university-of-not-less-rotten-borough", if management of these universities has achieved the inclusion of relevant journals in NCS. All these indicators are different. But theoretically, Google has a greater base. ... In each country, the basic citation system is Scopus or WOS. Sometimes, maybe with the addition of an appropriate national system.
Google is not generally accepted citation system!
I believe that Scopus is the best one. It cites only papers publishes in high standard journals rather than google scholar, which cites papers published anywhere such as low standard paid open access journals and local conferences. Therefore, everyone will find that his/her citations in google scholar are higher than those in Scopus.
Publishing in Scoop's magazines makes the researcher and university the highest scientific
Scopus is comparatively good and a reliable source. Many Universities and research institutions accepts Scopus..
Alternatively, I find www.scimagojr.com/ very informative too.
scopus index is best also you can find journal ranking at scimago
Scopus H-Index is considered to be a reliable and rigorous measure of quality of academic publications whereas Google Scholar H-Index while ok is considered to be an inflated measure of quality of academic publications
Google Scholar, for sure. The most authoritative and comprehensive citations engine.
The question is relevant and sensitive. A researcher can not be measured only by an indicator, his career and products should speak for themselves [Teaching, training of human resources, habilitation, participation in forums, publications, etc.]. Indicators based only on the publication and measurement of biased "impacts" will not help to really size the researcher.
Finally (here I answer the question) I think that Google Scholar, with all its deficiencies, is much better because it considers "everything" that it finds in the network about the researcher. The interesting thing is that it integrates everything you have published (if you find it), regardless of whether it was in a journal indexed in Scopus or Wos.
- Badges
- Science topic