The Impact of Errors in the Sсopus Database on the Research Assessment
- 33 Downloads
This paper presents the results of the analysis of the causes for duplicate profiles in the Scopus database on the basis of a random sampling of profiles of 400 Russian authors and 400 organizations. We estimate the number of duplicate profiles and calculate the level of uncertainty that errors in bibliographic descriptions can contribute to the results of scientometric studies using the Scopus database. The analysis showed that in Scopus 76% of the organizations and 24% of the authors have duplicate profiles. In this regard, organizations lose an average of 17% of publications and authors lose 11%. The results of this study can be used in elaboration of the Scopus database and estimating the error level in the research assessment of institutions and individuals.
Keywords:bibliographic databases Scopus identification scientometrics bibliometrics bibliographic errors ORCID
This work was carried out as part of the subject of research work no. 0334-2019-006 with the support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grant no. 18-011-00797.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Gus’kov, A.E., Kosyakov, D.V., and Selivanova, I.V., Methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of scientific organizations, Vestn. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2018, vol. 88, no. 5, pp. 430–443.Google Scholar
- 3.Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., and Mastrogiacomo, L., Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science, J. Inf., 2016, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 933–953.Google Scholar
- 4.Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., and Mastrogiacomo, L., The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus, J. Inf., 2016, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 174–182.Google Scholar
- 6.van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L., Accuracy of citation data in Web of Science and Scopus, arXiv:1906.07011. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1906/1906.07011.pdf.Google Scholar
- 9.Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C., Aguilar-Moya, R., Melero-Fuentes, D., and Aleixandre-Benavent, R., A systematic analysis of duplicate records in Scopus, J. Inf., 2015, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 570–576.Google Scholar
- 15.Mazov, N.A. and Gureyev, V.N., Modern challenges in bibliographic metadata identification, 3rd Russian-Pacific Conference on Computer Technology and Applications (RPC), Vladivostok, 2018, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
- 17.Al’perin, B.L., Vedyagin, A.A., and Zibareva, I.V., SciAct—information-analytical system of the Institute of Catalysis of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences for monitoring and stimulating scientific activity, Tr. Gos. Publ. Nauchno-Tekh.Bibl. Sib. Otdel. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2015, vol. 9, pp. 95–102.Google Scholar
- 18.Kovyazina, E.V., Corporate repositories of scientific publications and problems of data exchange, Tr. Gos. Publ. Nauchno-Tekh.Bibl. Sib. Otdel. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2016, vol. 10, pp. 288–292.Google Scholar
- 19.Zakharova, S.S. and Gureeva, Yu.A., Scientific publications: From card index to bibliographic profiles, Bibliosfera, 2017, no. 2, pp. 85–89.Google Scholar
- 21.Mogil’chak, E.L., Vyborochnyi metod v empiricheskom sotsiologicheskom issledovanii: Ucheb. posobie (The Selective Technique in Empirical Sociological Research: Handbook), Yekaterinburg: Ural. Univ., 2015.Google Scholar