Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia

Tomaz Bartol (), Gordana Budimir, Doris Dekleva-Smrekar, Miro Pusnik and Primoz Juznic
Additional contact information
Tomaz Bartol: University of Ljubljana
Gordana Budimir: Institute of Information Science
Doris Dekleva-Smrekar: Central Technological Library at the University of Ljubljana
Miro Pusnik: Central Technological Library at the University of Ljubljana
Primoz Juznic: University of Ljubljana

Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 98, issue 2, No 44, 1504 pages

Abstract: Abstract Web of Science (wos) and scopus have often been compared with regard to user interface, countries, institutions, author sets, etc., but rarely employing a more systematic assessment of major research fields and national production. The aim of this study was to appraise the differences among major research fields in scopus and wos based on a standardized classification of fields and assessed for the case of an entire country (Slovenia). We analyzed all documents and citations received by authors who were actively engaged in research in Slovenia between 1996 and 2011 (50,000 unique documents by 10,000 researchers). Documents were tracked and linked to scopus and wos using complex algorithms in the Slovenian cobiss bibliographic system and sicris research system where the subject areas or research fields of all documents are harmonized by the Frascati/oecd classification, thus offsetting some major differences between wos and scopus in database-specific subject schemes as well as limitations of deriving data directly from databases. scopus leads over wos in indexed documents as well as citations in all research fields. This is especially evident in social sciences, humanities, and engineering & technology. The least citations per document were received in humanities and most citations in medical and natural sciences, which exhibit similar counts. Engineering & technology reveals only half the citations per document compared to the previous two fields. Agriculture is found in the middle. The established differences between databases and research fields provide the Slovenian research funding agency with additional criteria for a more balanced evaluation of research.

Keywords: Bibliometrics; Citation analysis; Research performance; Research evaluation; Research fields; Research information systems; Slovenia (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (52)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:98:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1148-8

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().