Abstract
Comparative studies of Web of Science and Scopus databases relate mainly to journal coverage and citation indicators. The aim of this study is to compare self-citation patterns in these databases. 25 years of scientific production (1996–2020) in Slovenia was analyzed. To offset limitations and errors of deriving data directly from databases, we used the COBISS/SciMet portal, which systematically collects records of citations with various authors identifiers for the total national scientific production. Both databases were harmonized according to the Frascati/OECD classification scheme of research fields. Self-citations were determined by comparing author identifiers rather than their names. Scopus shows better results in self-citation counts. This is mainly due to its higher coverage of local academic journals published in Slovenia and other regional journals, mostly in Humanities, where a fifth of all documents received about 3% more self-citations. In Engineering & Technology and Social Sciences, about 4% and 3% of all documents received approximately 2% more self-citations. However, these differences cause less than 3% more self-citations per researchers and two databases did not substantially differ in the relative citation ranking of researchers. Also, similar patterns of faster ageing of self-citations, rather than citations, were found in both databases, indicating a similar diminishing impact of self-citations on citations over time for all fields.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
COBISS/SciMet portal—http://scimet.izum.si/.
References
Aksnes, D. W. (2003). A macro study of self-citation. Scientometrics, 56(2), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021919228368.
Baccini, A., De Nicolao, G., & Petrovich, E. (2019). Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis. PLoS ONE, 14(9), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221212.
Bar-Ilan, J., Levene, M., & Lin, A. (2007). Some measures for comparing citation databases. Journal of Informetrics, 1(1), 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2006.08.001.
Bartol, T., Budimir, G., Dekleva-Smrekar, D., Pušnik, M., & Juznič, P. (2014). Assessment of research fields in scopus and web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1491–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8.
Blagus, R., Leskošek, B. L., & Stare, J. (2015). Comparison of bibliometric measures for assessing relative importance of researchers. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1743–1762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1622-6.
Budimir, G., Juršnik, L., & Rachimis, P. (2016). Self-citations of publications by Slovenian researchers in web of science and scopus from 1996 to 2013. Knjižnica, 60(1), 45–60. Retrieved from http://knjiznica.zbds-zveza.si/index.php/knjiznica/article/view/561/531
Čadej, R., & Južnič, P. (2015). Slovenian research output in social sciences and humanities as represented in web of science and scopus. Knjižnica, 59(4), 43–58.
Carley, S., Porter, A. L., & Youtie, J. (2013). Toward a more precise definition of self-citation. Scientometrics, 94(2), 777–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0745-2.
Chirici, G. (2012). Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science. SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases. IForest, 5(3), 101–107. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0613-005.
Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010). Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: effects of different calculation methods. Scientometrics, 82(3), 517–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0187-7.
Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25(1), 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504966.
Curk, L., Budimir, G., Seljak, T., & Gerkeš, M. (2006). Povezovanje sistemov: SICRIS – COBISS.SI – web of science. Organizacija Znanja, 11(4), 230–235. https://doi.org/10.3359/oz0604230.
Demetrescu, C., Ribichini, A., & Schaerf, M. (2018). Accuracy of author names in bibliographic data sources: An Italian case study. Scientometrics, 117(3), 1777–1791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2945-x.
Demšar, F., & Južnič, P. (2013). Transparency of research policy and the role of librarians. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 46(2), 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000613503002.
Flatt, J., Blasimme, A., & Vayena, E. (2017). Improving the measurement of scientific success by reporting a self-citation index. Publications, 5(3), 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications5030020.
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016). Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in scopus and web of science. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 933–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.07.003.
Gasparyan, A. Y., Yessirkepov, M., Gerasimov, A. N., Kostyukova, E. I., & Kitas, G. D. (2016). Scientific author names: Errors, corrections, and identity profiles. Biochemia Medica, 26(2), 169–173. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2016.017.
Ghazavi, R., Taheri, B., & Ashrafi-rizi, H. (2019). Article quality indicator: Proposing a new indicator for measuring article quality in scopus and web of science. Journal of Scientometric Research, 8(1), 09–17. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.8.1.2.
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schlemmer, B. (2004). A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication. Scientometrics, 59(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000013299.38210.74.
Glänzel, W., Debackere, K., Thijs, B., & Schubert, A. (2006). A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics, 67(2), 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9.
González de Dios, J., Alonso-Arroyo, A., & Aleixandre-Benavent, R. (2019). Half a century of anales de pediatría. Evolution of its main bibliometric indicators in the web of science and scopus international databases. Anales de Pediatría (English Edition), 90(3), 194.e1-194.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpede.2018.12.002.
González-Sala, F., Osca-Lluch, J., & Haba-Osca, J. (2019). Are journal and author self-citations a visibility strategy? Scientometrics, 119(3), 1345–1364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03101-3.
Gul, S., Shah, T. A., & Shafiq, H. (2017). The prevalence of synchronous self-citation practices at the institutional level. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 22(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol22no1.1.
Harzing, A.-W. (2015). Health warning: might contain multiple personalities—the problem of homonyms in thomson reuters essential science indicators. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2259–2270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1699-y.
Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google scholar, scopus and the web of science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Baas, J., Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2019). A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field. PLoS Biology, 17(8), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000384.
Kacem, A., Flatt, J. W., & Mayr, P. (2020). Tracking self-citations in academic publishing. Scientometrics, 123(2), 1157–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03413-9.
Kosmulski, M. (2020). Nobel laureates are not hot. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03378-9.
Kulkarni, A. V., Aziz, B., Shams, I., & Busse, J. W. (2011). Author self-citation in the general medicine literature. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020885.
Larivière, V., & Macaluso, B. (2011). Improving the coverage of social science and humanities researchers’ output: The case of the Érudit journal platform. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2437–2442. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21632.
Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P., & Bornmann, L. (2016). Professional and citizen bibliometrics: Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators—a state-of-the-art report. Scientometrics, 109(3), 2129–2150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2150-8.
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). Google scholar, web of science, and scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002.
Meho, L. I., & Rogers, Y. (2008). Citation counting, citation ranking, and h -index of human-computer interaction researchers: A comparison between scopus and web of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1711–1726. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.
Memon, A. R., & Azim, M. E. (2019). Open researcher and contributor identifier and other author identifiers: Perspective from Pakistan. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 69(6), 888–891.
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2769-8.
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.
Nakagawa, S., & Cuthill, I. C. (2007). Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: A practical guide for biologists. Biological Reviews, 82(4), 591–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00027.x.
Ossenblok, T. L. B., Engels, T. C. E., & Sivertsen, G. (2012). The representation of the social sciences and humanities in the web of science - A comparison of publication patterns and incentive structures in Flanders and Norway (2005–9). Research Evaluation, 21(4), 280–290. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs019.
Pajić, D. (2015). Globalization of the social sciences in Eastern Europe: Genuine breakthrough or a slippery slope of the research evaluation practice? Scientometrics, 102(3), 2131–2150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1510-5.
Pečlin, S., Južnič, P., Blagus, R., Sajko, M. Č, & Stare, J. (2012). Effects of international collaboration and status of journal on impact of papers. Scientometrics, 93(3), 937–948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0768-8.
Peroni, S., Ciancarini, P., Gangemi, A., Nuzzolese, A. G., Poggi, F., & Presutti, V. (2020). The practice of self-citations: A longitudinal study. Scientometrics, 123(1), 253–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03397-6.
Shah, T. A., Gul, S., & Gaur, R. C. (2015). Authors self-citation behaviour in the field of library and information science. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(4), 458–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-10-2014-0134.
Shah, S. R. U., Mahmood, K., Hameed, A. (2017). Review of Google scholar, web of science, and scopus search results: The case of inclusive education research. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac%0A, http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1544.
Snyder, H., & Bonzi, S. (1998). Patterns of self-citation across disciplines (1980–1989). Journal of Information Science, 24(6), 431–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/016555159802400606.
Thananusak, T. (2019). Science mapping of the knowledge base on sustainable entrepreneurship, 1996–2019. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(13), 2015–2030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133565.
Vinkler, P. (2007). Eminence of scientists in the light of the h -index and other scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science, 33(4), 481–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506072165.
Walters, W. H. (2017). Citation-based journal rankings: Key questions, metrics, and data sources. IEEE Access, 5(Section V), 22036–22053. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2761400.
Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 365–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: GB, PJ; Methodology: GB; Formal analysis and investigation: GB; Writing—original draft preparation: GB, SR; Writing—review and editing: PJ, ST, GB, SR; Verification: PJ, ST; Supervision: PJ. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
Not applicable.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Budimir, G., Rahimeh, S., Tamimi, S. et al. Comparison of self-citation patterns in WoS and Scopus databases based on national scientific production in Slovenia (1996–2020). Scientometrics 126, 2249–2267 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03862-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03862-w