DIMENSIONS: RE-DISCOVERING THE ECOSYSTEM OF SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION

被引:43
作者
Orduna-Malea, Enrique [1 ]
Delgado-Lopez-Cozar, Emilio [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Politecn Valencia, Cami Vera S-N, Valencia 46020, Spain
[2] Univ Granada, Fac Comunicac & Documentac, Campus Cartuja S-N, E-18071 Granada, Spain
来源
PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION | 2018年 / 27卷 / 02期
关键词
Dimensions; Bibliographic databases; Bibliometric portals; Bibliometrics; Online academic profiles; Research evaluation; Discovery tools;
D O I
10.3145/epi.2018.mar.21
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
The overarching aim of this work is to provide a detailed description of the free version of Dimensions (new bibliographic database produced by Digital Science and launched in January 2018). To do this, the work is divided into two differentiated blocks. First, its characteristics, operation, and features are described, focusing on its main strengths and weaknesses. Secondly, an analysis of its coverage is carried out (comparing it against Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus and Google Scholar) in order to determine whether the bibliometric indicators offered by Dimensions have an order of magnitude significant enough to be used. To this end, an analysis is carried out at three levels: journals (sample of 20 publications in 'Library & Information Science'), documents (276 articles published by the Journal of informetrics between 2013 and 2015), and authors (28 people awarded with the Derek de Solla Price prize). Preliminary results indicate that Dimensions has coverage of the recent literature superior to Scopus, although inferior to Google Scholar. With regard to the number of citations received, Dimensions offers slightly lower figures than Scopus. Despite this, the number of citations in Dimensions exhibits a strong correlation with Scopus and somewhat less (although still significant) with Google Scholar. For this reason, it is concluded that Dimensions is an alternative for carrying out citation studies, able to rival Scopus (greater coverage and free of charge) and Google Scholar (greater functionalities for the treatment and data export).
引用
收藏
页码:420 / 431
页数:12
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] Do "altmetrics" correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective
    Costas, Rodrigo
    Zahedi, Zohreh
    Wouters, Paul
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 66 (10) : 2003 - 2019
  • [2] Lopez-Cozar E. D., 2017, Research analytics: Boosting university productivity and competitiveness through scientometrics, P59, DOI DOI 10.1201/9781315155890-4
  • [3] A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013)
    Martin-Martin, Alberto
    Orduna-Malea, Enrique
    Ayllon, Juan M.
    Delgado Lopez-Cozar, Emilio
    [J]. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE DOCUMENTACION CIENTIFICA, 2016, 39 (04):
  • [4] Nature's top 100 Re-revisited
    Martin-Martin, Alberto
    Ayllon, Juan M.
    Delgado Lopez-Cozar, Emilio
    Orduna-Malea, Enrique
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 66 (12) : 2714 - 2714
  • [5] McShea Jo, 2018, OUTSELL
  • [6] Mori Andres, 2018, DIMENSIONS METRICS A
  • [7] Ordufia-Malea Enrique, 2018, ANUARIO THI IN PRESS, V12
  • [8] Orduna-Malea E, 2016, La revolucion Google Scholar: Destapando la caja de Pandora academica
  • [9] Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar
    Orduna-Malea, Enrique
    Ayllon, Juan M.
    Martin-Martin, Alberto
    Delgado Lopez-Cozar, Emilio
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 2015, 104 (03) : 931 - 949
  • [10] Schonfeld R. C., 2018, The Scholarly Kitchen