Suchergebnisse

This research aimed to analyze the publications on fiscal control and corruption published in Google Scholar (Google academic) in the period between 2010 and 2019 using the Harzing's Publish or Perish tool. For this, he used the observational design and the type of study of bibliometric analysis as a methodology. Among the results it is highlighted that from 2016 to 2019 there is a decrease in publications on the subject, meanwhile, the citation indexes show a high level of citations of the subject with an annual average of 26 citations per document and an index h 78. In addition, the computer indicators show Corruption, evidence and political corruption with the most concurrent words in title, abstract and keywords. In conclusion, the study shows a high level of citation of publications on the subject and the need to address these contents by academics in South America and the Caribbean, in such a way that systematically describes the corruption facts that abound in This part of the world. ; Esta investigación tuvo por objetivo analizar las publicaciones sobre control fiscal y corrupción publicadas en Google Scholar (Google Académico) en el periodo entre 2010 y 2019 usando la herramienta Harzing's Publish or Perish. Para ello utilizó como metodología el diseño observacional y el tipo de estudio de análisis bibliométrico. Entre los resultados se destaca que de 2016 a 2019 se registra un decrecimiento publicaciones sobre el tema, por su parte, los índices de citación muestran un alto nivel de citas del tema con un promedio anual de 26 citas por documento y un índice h 78. Además, los indicadores informétricos muestran Corruption, evidence y political corruption con las palabras con más concurrencia en título, resumen y palabras claves. Como conclusión el estudio evidencia un alto nivel de citación de las publicaciones sobre el tema y la necesidad de abordar estos contenidos por los académicos de América del sur y el Caribe, de tal manera, que de forma sistemática se describan los hechos corrupción que abundan en esta parte del mundo.

Paper accepted for publication at the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. http://www.asis.org/jasist.html ; This paper follows up the work presented in the working paper 'Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: Simple, easy and tempting' available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0638 ; Google Scholar has been well received by the research community. Its promises of free, universal and easy access to scientific literature as well as the perception that it covers better than other traditional multidisciplinary databases the areas of the Social Sciences and the Humanities have contributed to the quick expansion of Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: two new bibliometric products that offer citation data at the individual level and at journal level. In this paper we show the results of a experiment undertaken to analyze Google Scholar's capacity to detect citation counting manipulation. For this, six documents were uploaded to an institutional web domain authored by a false researcher and referencing all the publications of the members of the EC3 research group at the University of Granada. The detection of Google Scholar of these papers outburst the citations included in the Google Scholar Citations profiles of the authors. We discuss the effects of such outburst and how it could affect the future development of such products not only at individual level but also at journal level, especially if Google Scholar persists with its lack of transparency. ; Nicolás Robinson-García is currently supported by a FPU Grant from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of the Spanish Government.

Google Scholar has been well received by the research community. Its promises of free, universal and easy access to scientific literature as well as the perception that it covers better than other traditional multidisciplinary databases the areas of the Social Sciences and the Humanities have contributed to the quick expansion of Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: two new bibliometric products that offer citation data at the individual level and at journal level. In this paper we show the results of a experiment undertaken to analyze Google Scholar's capacity to detect citation counting manipulation. For this, six documents were uploaded to an institutional web domain authored by a false researcher and referencing all the publications of the members of the EC3 research group at the University of Granada. The detection of Google Scholar of these papers outburst the citations included in the Google Scholar Citations profiles of the authors. We discuss the effects of such outburst and how it could affect the future development of such products not only at individual level but also at journal level, especially if Google Scholar persists with its lack of transparency. ; Patrocinador: Nicolás Robinson-García is currently supported by a FPU Grant from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of the Spanish Government. Nota : Paper accepted for publication at the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. http://www.asis.org/jasist.html This paper follows up the work presented in the working paper 'Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: Simple, easy and tempting' available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0638

From searching the works of José Martí in Google Scholar and the use of tools such as Publish or Perish, bibliometric indicators could be determined as the h index that shows the impact of Marti's work. The high values of h that achieves José Martí as author, would place him as a leading researcher currently, with a remarkable impact on Social Sciences. It was determined the Works of José Martí most cited, among which is in the first place "Nuestra America", which is demonstrated both by the total citations achieved, as following the annual variation for over 20 years.
Author's profile for José Martí, in Google Scholar was prepared allowing researchers to establish the authors and articles or books that cite the work of José Martí and opens the way for further research into the network of references to these

La aparición de internet en los años noventa supuso una revolución en el acceso a la información. Dos décadas más tarde nace Google Scholar, lo que va a suponer la democratización del acceso a la información académica, de manera que dicha información podrá llegar hasta aquellos con menos recursos.

This paper explores the usefulness of OpenAIRE, BASE, Recolecta, and Google Scholar (GS) for evaluating open access (OA) policies that demand a deposit in a repository. A case study was designed focusing on 762 financed articles with a project of FIS-2012 of the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, the Spanish national health service's main management body for health research. Its finance is therefore subject to the Spanish Government OA mandate. A search was carried out for full-text OA copies of the 762 articles using the four tools being evaluated and with identification of the repository housing these items. Of the 762 articles concerned, 510 OA copies were found of 353 unique articles (46.3%) in 68 repositories. OA copies were found of 81.9% of the articles in PubMed Central and copies of 49.5% of the articles in an institutional repository (IR). BASE and GS identified 93.5% of the articles and OpenAIRE 86.7%. Recolecta identified just 62.2% of the articles deposited in a Spanish IR. BASE achieved the greatest success, by locating copies deposited in IR, while GS found those deposited in disciplinary repositories. None of the tools identified copies of all the articles, so they need to be used in a complementary way when evaluating OA policies.

Se presentan rankings por disciplinas de las revistas científicas españolas de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas según Google Scholar (GS) para el periodo 2002-2011. Se ordenan de acuerdo con el índice h que es el indicador bibliométrico adoptado por Google. Se pretende con este trabajo comprobar la amplitud en la cobertura que posee Google Scholar de las revistas científicas españolas de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas y comparar las diferencias arrojadas respecto al período 2001-2010. Las búsquedas bibliográficas se efectuaron en el mes de marzo de 2013. Se calcula el índice h de 1038 revistas, de las que 251 son de Derecho, 157 de Educación, 137 de Economía, 109 de Psicología, 87 de Sociología, 56 de Ciencia Política, 54 de Geografía, 46 son de Antropología, 42 de Ciencias del Deporte, 39 de Urbanismo, 36 de Documentación y 24 de Comunicación. ; Rankings are presented by disciplines of Spanish scientific journals of social sciences and law according to Google Scholar (GS) for the period 2002-2011. They are sorted according to the h-index which is the Bibliometric indicator adopted by Google. Intends this work check the breadth in coverage that has Google Scholar of Spanish scientific journals of social sciences and law and compare the differences over the period 2001-2010. Bibliographic searches were conducted in the month of March 2013. H-index is calculated from 1038 journals, of which 251 are Law, 157 education, 137 economy, 109 psychology, 87 sociology, 56 political science, 54 geography, 46 anthropology, 42 sports science, 39 urban, 36 library and information science and 24 communication. ; EC3: Evaluación de la Ciencia y de la Comunicación Científica ; Trabajo financiado con cargo al proyecto HAR2011- 30383-C02-02 de la Dirección General de Investigación y Gestión del Plan Nacional de I+D+I. Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad.

Google Scholar is an appealing data source for the measurement of scientific production in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) fields. Its appeal derives from its extensive coverage of the literature. This contrasts with issues of data quality, which are still quite controversial. This chapter aims to evaluate the reliability and validity of bibliometric indicators taken from Scholar as well as their coverage of the scientific production in the social sciences. The analysis will be based on a comparison of Scholar with other bibliometric data sources (Web of Science and Scopus) plus an institutional dataset. The reliability of Scholar indicators will be investigated through correlational analysis, while their validity will be assessed using different external criteria (the results of national evaluation procedures based on a peer review approach). The analysis will be developed for the population of Italian university professors in a subset of SSH: political philosophy, history, political science and sociology. The final discussion of the results will take into account the various purposes that bibliometric exercises try to achieve.

El objetivo de este artículo es evaluar la visibilidad de los investigadores de Panamá y el impacto de sus publicaciones utilizando indicadores bibliométricos como h-index, i10-index y citas de los perfiles en Google Scholar Citations (GSC) categorizados por sexo, institución, miembro del SNI. Para la recolección automática de datos en GSC se creó un algoritmo en el lenguaje R que extrajo 860 perfiles de 47 instituciones, el 25,5% de los perfiles no se contabilizaron citas, el 29,5% tiene un h-index mayor a 5. De los 14.530 trabajos extraídos de los perfiles, 49,3% ha sido citado una vez generando 287.616 citas, 62% de las citas son de trabajos de 28 investigadores. Existe visibilidad de los investigadores de Panamá en GSC, pero solo el 3,3% aporta el 62% de las citas, poco impacto en las publicaciones y errores de indexación, esto sugiere crear políticas institucionales para normalizar la creación de los perfiles.

Many studies demonstrate differences in the coverage of citing publications in Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). Here, we examine to what extent citation data from the two databases reflect the scholarly impact of women and men differently. Our conjecture is that WoS carries an indirect gender bias in its selection criteria for citation sources that GS avoids due to criteria that are more inclusive. Using a sample of 1250 U.S. researchers in Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Cardiology and Chemistry, we examine gender differences in the average citation coverage of the two databases. We also calculate database-specific h-indices for all authors in the sample. In repeated simulations of hiring scenarios, we use these indices to examine whether women's appointment rates increase if hiring decisions rely on data from GS in lieu of WoS. We find no systematic gender differences in the citation coverage of the two databases. Further, our results indicate marginal to non-existing effects of database selection on women's success-rates in the simulations. In line with the existing literature, we find the citation coverage in WoS to be largest in Cardiology and Chemistry and smallest in Political Science and Sociology. The concordance between author-based h-indices measured by GS and WoS is largest for Chemistry followed by Cardiology, Political Science, Sociology and Economics.

Nous utilisons les citations Google Scholar 2010 des économistes exerçants en France en 2008 afin de dessiner un panorama de la recherche en économie en France et de tester l'utilisation d'un support plus large qu'Econlit pour l'évaluation de la production de recherche. Nous comparons les indicateurs de citations tels que le nombre de citations divisés par le nombre d'auteurs, l'indice H ou l'indice G calculés au niveau individuel mais aussi des centres de recherche et universités avec des indices de publications calculés via la base de données EconLit et prenant plus ou moins en compte la qualité des journaux. Ces comparaisons sont menées sur différentes périodes de temps. La hiérarchie des institutions calculée avec l'approche Google Scholar est relativement proche de celle observée lorsque l'on utilise des scores de publications. Néanmoins, on observe également certaines variations spectaculaires pour quelques institutions, positives principalement lorsque l'économie n'est pas le cœur de métier de ces institutions.

Se presenta la implementación de Schema.org en el repositorio RODERIC de la Universitat de València. Para el análisis del impacto de la implementación se han definido ocho indicadores que se han analizado en Google Search y Google Scholar según el caso: visitas, visitas a registros bibliográficos, documentos descargados, impresiones, clics, CTR, posición media en la SERP y posición en la SERP que fueron analizados durante dos períodos consecutivos de un año, antes y después de la implementación. Los resultados obtenidos muestran resultados desiguales para ambos buscadores. En el caso de Google Search, a pesar de conseguirse un incremento considerable en el número de impresiones (21,05%), tanto los clics (10,38%), como el número de sesiones (15,03%) descienden. En el caso de Google Scholar, las sesiones se incrementan ligeramente (6,25%). El número de registros visualizados y de descargas de documentos del repositorio mejora en un 16,21% y 12,18%, respectivamente.