Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics)

Are you interested in contributing to HLWIKI International? contact: dean.giustini@ubc.ca To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the A-Z index. Last Update 14 March 2018 Introduction See also Author impact metrics | Google scholar | Impact factors | Scopus (Elsevier) Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science Core Collection (formerly part of Thomson Reuters) (see LibGuides) is hosted on the Web of Science platform and provides access to a network of scholarly articles linked by their cited references. With coverage extending from 1900 to the present, the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS_CC) is seen to be "...the original, deepest, and most complete citation index supporting scholarly research and research performance evaluation". The Web of Science Core Collection provides cover to cover indexing for over 19,000 journal titles in the sciences, social sciences, and the arts and humanities. The WSCC covers about 65 million source papers from the 1900s to the present, and is updated weekly with 28,000 new articles and 800,000 new cited references. Content overview and features Indexes 19,718 journals from 252 subject categories; each journal has been selected for coverage and is included only when it has met high standards for content, editorial, and ethical standards. 2700 open access journals are covered 190,000 + full proceedings from conferences, symposia, seminars, colloquia worldwide 80,000 + books in across all disciplines Journal backfiles to 1900; cover-to-cover indexing; full-cited reference indexing Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) – 8892 international journals and highly cited book series in 170 categories back to 1900 Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) – 3252 international journals and highly cited book series in 50 subject categories back to 1900 Arts & Humanities Citation Index – 1780 international journals and highly cited book series in 25 categories back to 1975 Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) – 5793 journals in emerging fields in the sciences, social sciences, and arts & humanities. ESCI provide coverage from 2016 forward. An ESCI backfile to 2005 will be released in 2018. Complete backfiles to 1900 puts the total number of records indexed at over ~65 million records Coverage from 1945 to present puts the total at over ~64 million records Cited Reference Search – all cited references are indexed and searchable Author identification tools – all authors are indexed and algorithmically clustered to account for name ambiguity. Author Affiliations – All Author Affiliations are indexed. Institutional affiliation are normalized for over 6500 institutions and searchable in the “Organization Enhanced” field Funding data from published funding acknowledgment and from integration with Medline and ResearchFish is indexed and searchable. Analysis capabilities Direct links to your full-text collections Index Chemicus®: Over 2.6 million compounds, to 1993 Current Chemical Reactions®: Over one million reactions, to 1986, plus INPI archives from 1840 to 1985. The Web of Science platform and the Web of Science Core Collection provides unique search methods including cited reference searching. Users can navigate forward and backward through the literature using the cited reference connections between documents, and search broadly across all disciplines and time periods. Full text links - Users can navigate to print and electronic collections using institutional link resolvers. Web of Science Core Collection (WoS_CC) is searchable with complete bibliographic data, cited reference data and navigation and links to full text. See also Journal Citation Reports for information about how the Journal Impact Factor and other journal citation performance metrics are derived from Web of Science Core Collection data Essential Science Indicators for information on how Web of Science Core Collection data is used to benchmark “hot” and “highly cited” articles as well as “highly cited” institutions, researchers, journals, and countries. InCites is a customized, citation-based research analytics tool on the Web that enables you to evaluate institutional productivity and benchmark your output Videos and tutorials References See also Wikipedia entry on Web of Science Abrizah A, Zainab AN, Kiran K, Raj RG. LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: a comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics. 2012. Adriaanse LS, Rensleigh C. Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: a content comprehensiveness comparison. Electronic Library. 2013;31(6):727-744. Adriaanse LS, Rensleigh C. Comparing Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar from an Environmental Sciences perspective. S Afr J Libr Inform Sci. 2011;77(2):169–178. Archambault E, Campbell D, Gingras Y, Lariviere V. Comparing of science bibliometric statistics obtained from the web and Scopus. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2009;60:1320–1326. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical Digital Libraries. 2006;3:7. Bar-Ilan J. Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2010;82(3). Bar-Ilan J. Which h-index? a comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2008;74(2):257-271. Chadegani AA, et al. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. arXiv preprint arXiv:1305.0377 (2013). De Groote SL. Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: a case study of the h-index in nursing. Nuring Outlook. June 2012. Etxebarria G, Gomez-Uranga M. Use of Scopus and Google Scholar to measure social sciences production in four major Spanish universities. Scientometrics. 2010;82(2):333-349. Falagas ME, Pitsouni E, Malietzis GA. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal. 2008;22:338-342. Fingerman S. Web of Science and Scopus: current features and capabilities. Issues in Sci Tech Libr Fall. 2006 Franceschet M. A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2010;(3):243-258. Gavel Y, Iselid L. Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study. Online Inform Rev. 2008;32(1):8-21. Goodwin C. Web of Science. Charleston Advisor. 2014;16(2):55-61. Harzing AW, Alakangas S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics. 2016 Feb 1;106(2):787-804. Halevi G, Moed H, Bar-Ilan J. Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature. Journal of Informetrics. 2017 Aug 31;11(3):823-34. Haunschild R, Hug SE, Brändle MP, Bornmann L. The number of linked references of publications in Microsoft Academic in comparison with the Web of Science. Scientometrics. 2018:1-4. Kloda LA. Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for comprehensive citation tracking. Evidence Based Lib Info Pract. 2007;2(3):87-90. Kousha K, Thelwall M. Assessing the citation impact of books: the role of Google Books, Google Scholar and Scopus. J Am Soc Inform Sci Tech. 2011;62(11):2147-64. Kulkarni A. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA. 2009;302(10):1092-1096. Lopez-Illescas C, Moya-Anegon F, Moed HF. Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. J Informetrics 2008;2:304–316. Matthew EF, Eleni IP, George AM, Georgios P. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB. 2008;22:338-42. Moed HF, Plume A. Studying scientific migration in Scopus. Scientometrics. 2013;94(3):929-942. Miguel S, Chinchilla-Rodríguez Z, Moya-Anegon F. Open access and Scopus: a new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access. J Am Soc Info Sci Tech. 2011;1130-45. Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2016 Jan 1;106(1):213-28. Salisbury L. Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative review of content and searching capabilities. Charleston Advisor. 2009;11:1, 5-18. Sampson M, McGowan J. Managing database overlap in systematic reviews using Batch Citation Matcher: case studies using Scopus. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006;94(4):461-3. Schroeder R. Pointing users toward citation searching: using Google Scholar and Web of Science. portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2007;7(2):243-248. Winter JC, Zadpoor AA, Dodou D. The expansion of Google scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study. Scientometrics. 2014;98(2):1547-156.