Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Web of Science and Scopus language coverage

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The evaluation of research outputs in the form of journal articles is important to help with monitoring performance and to allocate funds. Elsevier’s Scopus and Clarivate’s Web of Science (WoS) are the two main sources for identifying outputs. For non-English-speaking countries, it is especially important that most of the scientific activity evaluated is represented in the bibliometric database used. All documents published in Scopus and WoS during 2018 (6,094,079 documents) were therefore analysed and compared for their languages and research areas. The most comprehensive source for each language and research area were identified and some coverage problems have been found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. http://www.leidenranking.com/.

  2. http://www.leidenranking.com/information/indicators.

  3. http://www.leidenmanifesto.org/.

References

  • Abrizah, A., Zainab, A. N., Kiran, K., & Raj, R. G. (2012). LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: A comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics,94(2), 721–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aksnes, D. W., & Sivertsen, G. (2019). A criteria-based assessment of the coverage of Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of Data and Information Science,4(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009). Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,60(7), 1320–1326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics,68(3), 329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, P., & Lascar, C. (2012). Comparing unique title coverage of Web of Science and Scopus in Earth and atmospheric sciences. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship.

  • Clarivate Analytics. (2019). Web of Science platform: Web of Science: Summary of Coverage. Retrieved June 10, 2019 from https://clarivate.libguides.com/webofscienceplatform/coverage.

  • Clermont, M., & Dyckhoff, H. (2012). Coverage of business administration literature in Google Scholar: Analysis and comparison with Econbiz, Scopus and Web of Science. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collazo-Reyes, F. (2014). Growth of the number of indexed journals of Latin America and the Caribbean: The effect on the impact of each country. Scientometrics,98(1), 197–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado, J. L. G., Alonso, J. A., & Jiménez, J. C. (Coords.). (2013). El español, lengua de comunicación científica (Vol. 12). Fundación Telefónica.

  • Franceschet, M. (2009). A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics,83(1), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología. (2017). Indicadores del sistema español de ciencia, tecnología e innovación. Retrieved June 12, 2019 from https://icono.fecyt.es/sites/default/files/filepublicaciones/libro_indicadores_2017.pdf.

  • Gavel, Y., & Iselid, L. (2008). Web of Science and Scopus: A journal title overlap study. Online Information Review,32(1), 8–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature News,520(7548), 429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics,12(4), 1160–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Markusova, V., & Akoev, M. (2018). Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. Scientometrics,116(2), 1153–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,106(1), 213–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation. (2018). Science and engineering indicators, chapter 5: Academic research and development. Retrieved June 10, 2019 from https://nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/assets/nsb20181.pdf.

  • Osca-Lluch, J., Miguel, S., Gonzalez, C., Penaranda-Ortega, M., & Quinones-Vidal, E. (2013). Coverage and overlap of the Web of Science and Scopus in the analysis of the Spanish scientific activity in Psychology. Anales De Psicología,29(3), 1025–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santa, S., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2010). Cobertura de la ciencia de América Latina y el Caribe en Scopus vs Web of Science. Investigación bibliotecológica,24(52), 13–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics,51(1), 335–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vivancos Cervero, V. (2009). El español, lengua para la ciencia y la tecnología. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Information Technologies Research Group, Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación, Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, 30100, Murcia, Spain

    Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta

  2. Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group, School of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, WV1 1LY, UK

    Michael Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha

Authors
  1. Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Thelwall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kayvan Kousha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vera-Baceta, MA., Thelwall, M. & Kousha, K. Web of Science and Scopus language coverage. Scientometrics 121, 1803–1813 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z

Keywords

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy