Google scholar bibliography

From HLWIKI Canada

Jump to: navigation, search
Google Scholar debuted in 2004
Are you interested in contributing to HLWIKI Canada - hlwiki.ca? contact: dean.giustini@ubc.ca

To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the wiki index.

Contents

Introduction

This entry attempts to list every article in English about Google scholar. Note that articles added recently to this bibliography will show the new2.gif new icon. As of 2012, the bibliography lists 133 articles in total). It is therefore exhaustive from 2004 to the present, and includes links to free fulltext or abstracts. (The bibliography does not include articles about general Google, or blog postings and blog essays.)

For more detailed information about Google scholar, see this entry on Google scholar.

Google scholar bibliography

A to J

  1. Abram S. Google Scholar: thin edge of the wedge? Info Outlook 2005 9(1): 44-46.
  2. Adlington J, Benda C. Checking under the hood: evaluating Google scholar for reference use. Internet Ref Services Quarterly 2005 10(3/4): 135-48.
  3. Anders ME, Evans DP. Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar literature searches. Respiratory Care. 2010;55(5):578-83.
  4. Anderson R. The (uncertain) future of libraries in a Google world: sounding an alarm. Internet Ref Serv Quar 2006 10(3/4): 29-36.
  5. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical Digital Libraries 2006, 3:7.
  6. Banks MA. The excitement of Google Scholar, the worry of Google Print. Biomed Digit Libr. 2005 Mar 22;2(1):2.
  7. Bar-Ilan J. Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2010;82(3).
  8. Bar-Ilan J. Which h-index? a comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 2008b 74(2):257-271.
  9. Bauer K, Bakkalbasi N. An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment. D-Lib Magazine 2005 (11):9
  10. Beavers AF. Searching for philosophy: a review of Google Scholar and Google News. Teaching Philosophy Dec2005 28(4):367-371.
  11. new2.gif Beel J, Gipp B. Academic Search Engine Spam and Google Scholar’s Resilience Against it. Journal of Electronic Publishing. December 2010.
  12. Beel J, Gipp B. Google scholar's ranking algorithm: the impact of articles' age. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations. April 2009;160-164.
  13. Bornmann L. Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry—Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics. January 2009;3(1):27-35
  14. Bosman J, Mourik I, van Rasch M, Sieverts E, Verhoeff H. Scopus reviewed and compared. The coverage and functionality of the citation database Scopus, including comparisons with Web of Science and Google Scholar. Utrecht University Library. 2006
  15. Bowering LB, Hartman KA. Google Scholar and the library web site: The early response by ARL libraries. College & Research Libraries 2006;67(2): 106-122.
  16. Bronshteyn K, Tvaruzka K. Using Google Scholar at the reference desk. Journal of Library Administration 2008;47(1):115–124.
  17. Burright M. Google Scholar: science & technology. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship 2006 Winter.
  18. new2.gif Bryson D. Google Scholar and e-journals. Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine 2010 09;33(3):122-125.
  19. Callicott B, Vaughn D. Google Scholar vs. library scholar: testing the performance of Schoogle. Internet Ref Serv Quart 10(3-4): 71-88.
  20. Cathcart R, Roberts A. Evaluating Google scholar as a tool for information literacy. Internet Ref Serv Quar 2006 10(3/4): 167-76.
  21. Chen X. MetaLib, WebFeat and Google: the strengths and weaknesses of federated search engines compared with Google. Online Info Rev 2006 20 (4): 413-27.
  22. Christianson M. Ecology Articles in Google Scholar: Levels of Access to Articles in Core Journals. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship Winter2007 50:3
  23. [Cohen LB. Finding scholarly content on the web: from Google Scholar to RSS feeds. Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries 42: 7-17.]
  24. Cooke R, Don R. Thinking Inside the Box: Comparing Federated Search Results from Google Scholar, Live Search Academic, and Central Search. J Libr Admin 46(3):31-42.
  25. Couto FM et al. Handling self-citations using Google Scholar. Cybermetrics 2009:13(1).
  26. Di Cesare R, Luzi D, Ruggieri R. The impact of Grey Literature in the web environment: A citation analysis using Google Scholar. Conference Papers: International Conference on Grey Literature. 2008: 49-63.
  27. Donlan R, Cooke R. Running with the devil: accessing library-licensed full text holdings through Google Scholar Internet Ref Serv Quart 2006 10(3/4): 149-57.
  28. new2.gif Dougan K. Music to our Eyes: Google Books, Google Scholar, and the Open Content Alliance. portal: Libraries & the Academy 2010 01;10(1):75-93.
  29. Drewry J. Google Scholar, Windows Live Academic Search and Beyond: A Study of New Tools and Changing Habits in ARL Libraries. School of Information and Library Science 2007
  30. Ettinger D. The Triumph of Expediency: The Impact of Google Scholar on Library Instruction. Journal of Library Administration. 2008;46(3):65–72.
  31. Etxebarria, G. & Gomez-Uranga, M. Use of Scopus and Google Scholar to measure social sciences production in four major Spanish universities. Scientometrics, Vol.82, N°2, Feb. 2010, pp. 333-349
  32. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 2008 Feb;22(2):338-42.
  33. Felter LM. The better mousetrap: Google Scholar, Scirus, and the Scholarly Search Revolution. Searcher 2005 13(2): 43-8.
  34. Ford L, O'Hara LH. It's all academic: Google Scholar, Scirus and Windows Live Academic Search. Journal of Library Administration. 2008; 46(3/4):43-52.
  35. Franceschet M. A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2009
  36. Freeman MK etal. Google scholar versus PubMed in locating primary literature to answer drug-related questions. Ann Pharmacother 3 March 2009
  37. Friend FJ. Google Scholar: potentially good for users of academic information. J Electronic Publishing Winter 2006, 9(1).
  38. García-Pérez MA. Accuracy and completeness of publication and citation records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: A case study for the computation of h indices in Psychology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.
  39. Gardner S, Eng S. Gaga over Google? Scholar in the social sciences. Library Hi Tech News 2005;22(8):42–5.
  40. Giustini D. Google scholar....and the rise of findability in (re)search. CACUL Teleconference, Wednesday March 8th, 2006.
  41. Giustini D, Barsky E. A look at Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scirus: comparisons and recommendations. J Can Health Lib Assoc 2005;26(3):85–9.
  42. Giustini D, Barsky E. Using Google Scholar in health research: comparisons with PubMed. 2005 CHLA/ABSC Conference, Toronto, 1 June 2005.
  43. Golderman G, Connolly B. Between the book covers: going beyond OPAC keyword searching with the deep linking capabilities of Google Scholar and Google Book Search. J Internet Cat 2007 7 (3/4): 17-24.
  44. Goodman A. Google Scholar vs. Real Scholarship. 2004. http://www.traffick.com/2004/11/google-scholar–vs-real-scholarship.asp
  45. Gorman GE. Giving way to Google. Online Info Rev 2006 30(2): 97-9.
  46. Grogg JE, Ferguson CL. OpenURL linking with Google Scholar. Searcher 2005 13(9): 39-46.
  47. Haase A, Follmann M, Skipka G, Kirchner H. Developing search strategies for clinical practice guidelines in SUMSearch and Google Scholar and assessing their retrieval performance. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Jun 30;7:28.
  48. Hamaker C, Spry B. Key issues – Google Scholar. Serials 2006: 9-11.
  49. Hartman KA, Mullen LB. Google Scholar and Academic Libraries: An Update. New Library World 2008;109(5/6):211-222.
  50. Harzing AWK, Wal van der R. Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 2008
  51. Haya G, Nygren E, Widmark W. Metalib and Google Scholar: a user study. Online Info Rev 2007 31(3): 365-75.
  52. Helms-Park R, Radia P, Stapleton P. A preliminary assessment of Google Scholar as a source of EAP students’ research materials Internet and Higher Education 2007 10(1): 65-76.
  53. new2.gif Herrera, G. Google scholar users & user behaviors: an exploratory study. College and Research Libraries. July 15, 2010.
  54. Henderson J. Google Scholar: a source for clinicians? CMAJ 2005 Jun 7;172(12):1549–50.
  55. new2.gif Hoseth A. Google Scholar. Charleston Advisor. 2011; 12(3):36-39.
  56. Howland JL, Wright TC, Howell S, Dickson C. Google Scholar and the Continuing Education Literature. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education. 2009;57:35-39.
  57. Howland JL, Wright TC, Boughan RA, Roberts BC. How scholarly is Google scholar? A comparison of Google scholar to library databases. Brigham Young University. June 2008.
  58. Jackson M. Using Metadata to discover the buried treasure in Google Book Search. Journal of Library Administration. 2008;1(47):165–173.
  59. Jacsó P. Metadata mega mess in Google Scholar. Online Information Review. 2010; 34(1):175-191.
  60. Jacsó P. The pros and cons of computing the h-index using Google Scholar for F. W. Lancaster. Online Information Review 2008;32(3):437-452.
  61. Jacsó P. Testing the calculation of a realistic h-index in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Library Trends Spring 2008;56(4):784-815.
  62. Jacso P. Google scholar revisited. Online Info Rev 2008 32(1): 102-114
  63. Jacso, P. Google Scholar (Redux). Peter’s Digital Reference Shelf. 2005a June
  64. Jacsó P. Google Scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Info Rev 2005;29(2):208–14.
  65. Jacsó P. As we may search – comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases. Current Science 2005 Nov 10;89(9):1537-47.
  66. Jacso P. Comparison and analysis of the citedness scores in Web of Science and Google Scholar. Lec Notes Comp Sci 2005c 3815:360-9.
  67. Jacso, P. Google Scholar and The Scientist (October 2005)
  68. Jacso P. Savvy searching - Google Scholar: The pros and the cons. Online Information Review, 29.2(2005): 208-214.
  69. Jacso P. Google Scholar's Ghost Authors. Libr.J. 2009 11;134(18):26-27.

K to Z

  1. Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I, Busse JW. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 2009;302(10):1092-1096.
  2. Kesselman M, Watsen SB. Google Scholar and libraries: point/counterpoint. Ref Serv Rev 2005;33(4): 380-7.
  3. Kloda LA. Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for comprehensive citation tracking. Evidence Based Lib Info Pract 2007;2(3):87-90.
  4. Kousha K. Thelwall M. Google Scholar Citations and Google Web/URL Citations: A Multi-Discipline Exploratory Analysis. In: Proceedings International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Seventh COLLNET, 2006 Meeting, Nancy, France.
  5. Kousha K. Thelwall M. Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: a comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics;74(2):273–294.
  6. Lackie RJ. Google’s print and scholar initiatives: the value of and impact on libraries and information services. Internet Ref Serv Quart 2006 10(3/4): 57-70.
  7. Lagace N, Chisman JK. How did we ever manage without the OpenURL? Ser Libr 2007 52(1-2): 211-22.
  8. Lê Mê-Linh. Google scholar: an outcast in the library world. CASLIS Occasional Paper Series No. 1, October 2008: 39-44.
  9. Levine-Clark M, Kraus J. Finding chemistry information using Google Scholar: a comparison with chemical abstracts service. Sci Tech Libr 2007 27(4): 3-17.
  10. new2.gif Li J, Burnham JF, Lemley T, Britton RM. Citation Analysis: Comparison of Web of Science®, Scopus™, SciFinder®, and Google Scholar. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries 2010 Jul;7(3):196-217.
  11. new2.gif Ma R, Dai Q, Ni C, Li X. An author co-citation analysis of information science in China with Chinese Google Scholar search engine, 2004–2006. Scientometrics. 2009;81(1):33-46.
  12. new2.gif Mastrangelo G, Fadda E, Rossi CR, Zamprogno E, Buja A, Cegolon L. Literature search on risk factors for sarcoma: PubMed and Google Scholar may be complementary sources. BMC Research Notes 2010 01;3:131-134.
  13. Matthew EF, Eleni IP, George AM, Georgios P. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal 2008;22:338-42.
  14. Mayr P, Walter A. An exploratory study of Google Scholar. Online Info Rev 2007 31 6: 814-30.
  15. Meho LI, Yang K. Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. 2007
  16. Meier JJ, Conklin TW. Google Scholar’s coverage of the engineering literature: an empirical study. J Acad Librarianship, May 2008.
  17. Mikki S. Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for Earth Sciences. Scientometrics. 2010;82(2).
  18. [Miller W, Pellen R. Google Scholar and More: New Google Applications and Tools For Libraries and Library U. Routledge, 2008]
  19. Moskovkin WM. The potential of using the Google Scholar search engine for estimating the publication activities of universities. Scientific and Technical Information Processing. 2009;36(4):198–202.
  20. [Moussa S, Touzani M. Ranking marketing journals using the Google Scholar-based HG-index. Journal of Informetrics 2010;4(1): 107-117.]
  21. Mukherjee B. Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? A bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.2009;3(60):581-594.
  22. Mullen LB, Hartman KA. Google Scholar and the library Web site: the early response by ARL libraries. College and Research Libraries 2006 Mar;67(2):106–22.
  23. Myhill M. Google Scholar - a review. Charleston Advisor. April 2005. 6(4): n.p.
  24. Neuhaus E, Neuhaus C, Asher A, Wrede C. The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: an empirical study. Libraries and the Academy 2006;(2):127–41.
  25. Neuhaus C, Neuhaus E, Asher A. Google scholar goes to school: the presence of Google scholar on college and university web Sites. 2008 January 34(1):39-51
  26. Neville K. Google scholar and more: new Google applications and tools for libraries and library users. Library Hi Tech. 2010;28(2):333-4.
  27. Noll HM. Where Google stands on art: an evaluation of content coverage in online databases. A Master’s Paper for the M.S. in L.S degree. April, 2008.
  28. Norberg L. Google Scholar, Windows Live Academic Search and beyond: a study of new tools and changing habits in ARL Libraries
  29. Norris BP. Google: its impact on the library. Library Hi Tech News 2006 23 9: 9-11.
  30. Norris M, Oppenheim C, Rowland F. Finding open access articles using Google, Google Scholar, OAIster and OpenDOAR. Online Information Review 2008;32(6):709-715.
  31. Norris M, Oppenheim, C. Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. Journal of Informetrics 2007 1(2): 161-9.
  32. Noruzi A. Google Scholar: the new generation of citation indexes. Libri 2007 55 4: 170-80.
  33. Notess GR. Scholarly Web searching: Google Scholar and Scirus. Online 2005;29(4):39–41.
  34. Nygren E Haya G, Widmark, W. Students experience of Metalib and Google Scholar. Stockholm University, University Library. 2006
  35. O’Hara LH. Providing access to electronic journals in academic libraries: a general survey Serials Librarian. 2007 51(3/4): 119-28.
  36. O’Leary M. Google Scholar: what’s in it for you? Info Today 2005 22(7):35-9.
  37. [Pauly D, Stergiou KI. Equivalence of results from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI’s Citation Index and Google’s Scholar service. ESEP 2005:33–35.
  38. Pomerantz J. Google Scholar and 100% availability of information. Information Technology and Libraries 2006 Oct 19;25(1):52-6.
  39. Potter C. Standing on the Shoulders of Libraries: A Holistic and Rhetorical Approach to Teaching Google Scholar. Journal of Library Administration. 2008;47(1):5–28
  40. Price G. Google Scholar is now open to all libraries. Search Engine Journal. 2005
  41. Rahm E, Thor A. Citation analysis of database publications. ACM Sigmod Record 34(4), 2005.
  42. Ripple AS. Expert googling: best practices and advanced strategies for using google in health sciences libraries. Med Ref Serv Q. 2006 Summer;25(2):97-107.
  43. Robinson ML, Wusteman J. Putting Google Scholar to the test: a preliminary study. Program: electronic library and information systems. 2007 41(1): 71-80.
  44. Sadeh T. Google Scholar versus metasearch systems. High Energy Physics Libraries Webzine 2006 Feb;12.
  45. Schmidt J. Promoting library services in a Google world. Library World 2007 28 6/7: 337-46.
  46. Schroeder R. Pointing users toward citation searching: using Google Scholar and Web of Science. Libraries and the Academy 2007;7(2):243-8.
  47. Schultz M. Comparing test searches in PubMed and Google Scholar. J Med Lib Assoc 2007 95 4:442-5.
  48. Smith AG. Benchmarking Google Scholar with the New Zealand PBRF research assessment exercise, Scientometrics 2008 (74)2:309-316.
  49. Smith AG. Google Scholar as a cybermetric tool: a comparison with the New Zealand PBRF research assessment. Paper to be presented at 9th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Leuven, Belgium, 7-9 Sept, 2006.
  50. Sondemann TJ. On Google Scholar blog - (no posts since 2005) http://schoogle.blogspot.com/
  51. Strachan G. Google Scholar and Google Print: the brave new world? Editors' Bulletin July 2006;2(2):27-33.
  52. Taylor S. Google scholar – friend or foe? Interlend Doc Supply 2007 35(1):4-6.
  53. Tenopir C. Google in the academic library: undergraduates may find all they want on Google Scholar Library Journal 2005 February:32.
  54. Thelwall, M. Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics 2008 74(2): 273-294.
  55. new2.gif van Aalst J. Using Google Scholar to estimate the impact of journal articles in education. Educational Researcher. 2010;39:387-400.
  56. Vilelle L. Join the conversation: show your library's Google Scholar and Book Search expertise. Journal of Library Administration. 2008;46(3):53–64.
  57. Vine R. Google Scholar. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2006 Jan;94(1):97–9.
  58. Walters WH. Google scholar search performance: comparative recall and precision. portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2009;(9)1:5-24.
  59. Walters WH. Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Info Processing Man 2007 43(4): 1121-32.
  60. White B. Examining the claims of Google Scholar as a serious information source. New Zealand Library & Information Management Journal 2006 50 1:1-24.
  61. Wleklinski JM. Studying Google Scholar: wall to wall coverage? Info Today 29(3):22-6.
  62. Yang K, Meho LI. Citation analysis: a comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science Proceedings of the 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST). 2006
  63. York MC. Calling the scholars home: Google Scholar as a tool for rediscovering the academic library Internet Ref Serv Quart 2007 10(3/4): 117-33.
  64. new2.gif Younger P. Using Google Scholar to conduct a literature search. Nursing Standard 2010 07/14;24(45):40-48.
Retrieved from "http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Google_scholar_bibliography"
Personal tools