Author:
Torres-Salinas Daniel,Robinson-Garcia Nicolas,Miguel Campanario Juan,Delgado López-Cózar Emilio
Abstract
Purpose
– The aim of this study is to analyse the disciplinary coverage of Thomson Reuters' Book Citation Index database focusing on publisher presence, impact and specialisation.
Design/methodology/approach
– The authors conducted a descriptive study in which they examined coverage by discipline, publisher distribution by field and country of publication, and publisher impact. For this purpose the Thomson Reuters' subject categories were aggregated into 15 disciplines.
Findings
– Humanities and social sciences comprise 30 per cent of the total share of this database. Most of the disciplines are covered by very few publishers mainly from the UK and USA (75.05 per cent of the books), in fact 33 publishers hold 90 per cent of the whole share. Regarding publisher impact, 80.5 per cent of the books and chapters remained uncited. Two serious errors were found in this database: the Book Citation Index does not retrieve all citations for books and chapters; and book citations do not include citations to their chapters.
Originality/value
– There are currently no studies analysing in depth the coverage of this novel database which covers monographs.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,Information Systems
Reference35 articles.
1. Archambault, E.
and
Larivière, V.
(2009), “History of the journal impact factor: contingencies and consequences”, Scientometrics, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 639-653.
2. Archambault, E.
and
Larivière, V.
(2010), “The limits of bibliometrics for the analysis of the social sciences and humanities literature”, World Social Science Report 2010: Knowledge Divides, UNESCO, Paris, pp. 251-254.
3. Baneyx, A.
(2008), “‘Publish or perish’ as citation metrics used to analyze scientific output in the humanities: international case studies in economics, geography, social sciences, philosophy, and history”, Archivum Immunologie et Therapie Experimentalis, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 363-371.
4. Bar-Ilan, J.
(2010), “Citations to the ‘Introduction to informetrics’ indexed by WOS Scopus and Google Scholar”, Scientometrics, Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 495-506.
5. Chen, X.
(2012), “Google Books and WorldCat: a comparison of their content”, Online Information Review, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 507-516.
Cited by
42 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献