Does Microsoft Academic find early citations?
dc.contributor.author | Thelwall, Mike | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-10-26T11:24:44Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-10-26T11:24:44Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-10-27 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Thelwall, M. (2017). Does Microsoft Academic find early citations? Scientometrics, 114 (1), pp 325-334. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0138-9130 | en |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11192-017-2558-9 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620806 | |
dc.description | This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Springer in Scientometrics on 27/10/2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2558-9 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version. | |
dc.description.abstract | This article investigates whether Microsoft Academic can use its web search component to identify early citations to recently published articles to help solve the problem of delays in research evaluations caused by the need to wait for citation counts to accrue. The results for 44,398 articles in Nature, Science and seven library and information science journals 1996-2017 show that Microsoft Academic and Scopus citation counts are similar for all years, with no early citation advantage for either. In contrast, Mendeley reader counts are substantially higher for more recent articles. Thus, Microsoft Academic appears to be broadly like Scopus for citation count data, and is apparently not more able to take advantage of online preprints to find early citations. | |
dc.format | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Springer | en |
dc.relation.url | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-017-2558-9 | en |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Microsoft Academic | en |
dc.subject | Early citation impact | en |
dc.subject | Citation analysis | en |
dc.title | Does Microsoft Academic find early citations? | en |
dc.type | Journal article | |
dc.identifier.journal | Scientometrics | en |
dc.date.accepted | 2017-10-01 | |
rioxxterms.funder | University of Wolverhampton | en |
rioxxterms.identifier.project | UoW261017MT | en |
rioxxterms.version | AM | en |
rioxxterms.licenseref.uri | https://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 | en |
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate | 2017-10-26 | en |
dc.source.volume | 114 | |
dc.source.issue | 1 | |
dc.source.beginpage | 325 | |
dc.source.endpage | 334 | |
refterms.dateFCD | 2019-03-20T10:16:57Z | |
refterms.versionFCD | AM | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2017-10-26T00:00:00Z | |
html.description.abstract | This article investigates whether Microsoft Academic can use its web search component to identify early citations to recently published articles to help solve the problem of delays in research evaluations caused by the need to wait for citation counts to accrue. The results for 44,398 articles in Nature, Science and seven library and information science journals 1996-2017 show that Microsoft Academic and Scopus citation counts are similar for all years, with no early citation advantage for either. In contrast, Mendeley reader counts are substantially higher for more recent articles. Thus, Microsoft Academic appears to be broadly like Scopus for citation count data, and is apparently not more able to take advantage of online preprints to find early citations. |