한국비블리아학회지 (Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science)

한국비블리아학회 (Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Google Scholar의 학술정보 검색을 위한 정보 유용성 비교연구

An Investigation of Information Usefulness of Google Scholar in Comparison with Web of Science

  • 김현정 (서울여자대학교 문헌정보학과)
  • 투고 : 2014.08.30
  • 심사 : 2014.09.20
  • 발행 : 2014.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Google Scholar(GS)는 인용색인 데이터베이스 측면에서 나름 부족한 부분은 있으나 무료라는 점과 대규모 크기의 데이터를 갖춘 이용자 중심의 자료라는 점에서 많은 이용자에 의해 이용되고 있다. 본 연구는 Google Scholar의 학술정보 검색을 겨냥한 정보 유용성 진단을 목적으로 기존의 통제어휘의 기반을 둔 인용색인 데이터베이스인 Web of Science(WoS)와 대비하여 비교분석한다. 실증적 정보 유용성 평가를 위해 두 가지 분석으로 진행되었다; 첫째는 문헌정보학 분야의 학술지를 중심으로 두 데이터베이스의 검색결과와 인용문헌의 수의 차이가 있는가를 정량 분석했다. 두 번째는 WoS 접근성이 떨어지는 이용자의 경우 GS가 WoS의 대체 정보원으로 기능할 수 있는지에 대해 이용자를 대상으로 정성분석을 실시했다. 실증 데이터 분석을 통해 얻어진 연구 결과는 정량평가에서 GS는 WoS에 대비해서 통계적으로도 유의한 높은 검색결과와 인용문헌수의 차이를 보여 대체 정보원의 기능이 가능한 반면, 정성평가에서는 이용자들은 GS와 WoS의 질적 차이를 크게 느끼지 못하는 것으로 나타나 대체기능을 확인할 수 없는 것으로 나타났다.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether Google Scholar (GS) can substitute Web of Science (WoS) for those who don't have access to the subscription-based indexing service and if users feel GS is useful for scholarly information. To achieve the research purpose, the study evaluates both quantitative and qualitative aspects of the two databases. The major results through statistical analysis show that GS indexes much more records and citations for LIS journals than WoS(p < .01), but users' feedback about GS is not better than those about WoS.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 김완종, 김혜선, 현미환. 2013. 온라인 과학기술정보 서비스 품질에 대한 기대수준과 성과에 대한 지각수준이 이용자 만족도와 충성도에 미치는 영향. 정보관리학회지, 30(3): 207-228. (Kim, Wan-Jong, Hye-Sun Kim, & Mi-Hwan Hyun. 2013. "A Study on the Influence of the Expectation and Perceived Performance of the Online Science and Technology Information Service Quality on User Satisfaction and Royalty." Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 30(3): 207-228.) https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2013.30.3.207
  2. 심원식. 2012. 빅딜, 오픈액세스, 구글 학술검색과 대학도서관의 전자학술정보구독. 정보관리학회지, 29(4): 143-163. (Shim, Wonsik. 2012. "Big Deal, Open Access, Google Scholar and the Subscription of Electronic Scholarly Contents at University Libraries." Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 29(4): 143-163.) https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2012.29.4.143
  3. 유사라. 2000. Web 정보서비스 평가를 위한 기존 측정지표 분석 I. 한국문헌정보학회지, 34(3): 133-156. (Yoo, Sa-Rah. 2000. "Analysis of Quality Measurement & Evaluation Index in Applying Web Information (Yoo, Sa-Rah. 2004. Ensuring Quality and Value of Digital Information. Paju: Hanwool Academy.) Service I." Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 34(3): 133-156.)
  4. 유사라. 2004. 정보품질과 정보서비스 평가론. 파주: 한울아카데미.
  5. Abrizah, A., A.N. Zainab, K. Kiran, and R.G. Raj. 2013. "LIS Journals Scientific Impact and Subject Categorization: A Comparison between GS and Scopus." Scientometrics, 94: 721-740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0813-7
  6. Amara, Nabil and Rejean Landry. 2012. "Counting Citations in the Field of Business and Management: Why Use Google Scholar Rather Than the Web of Science." Scientometrics, 93: 553-581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0729-2
  7. Bergstrom, Carl T., and Jevin D. West. 2008. "Assessing Citations with the Eigenfactor Metrics." Neurology, 71(23): 1850-1851. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000338904.37585.66
  8. Carcia, J.A., Rosa Rodriguez-Sanchez, J. Fdez-Valdivia, Nicholas Robinson-Garcia, and Daniel Torres-Salinas. 2014. "Best-in-class and Strategic Benchmarking of Scientific Subject Categories of Web of Science in 2010." Scientometrics, 99: 615-630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1000-1
  9. Cothran, Tanya. 2011. "Google Scholar Acceptance and Use among Graduate Students: A Quantitative Study." Library & Information Science Research, 33: 293-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2011.02.001
  10. Crespo, Juan A., Neus Herranz, Yunrong Li, and Javier Ruiz-Castillo. 2014. "The Effect on Citation Inequality of Differences in Citation Practices at the Web of Science Subject Category Level." Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6): 1244-1256. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23006
  11. Davis, Fred D. 1989. "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology." MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  12. Davis, Philip M. 2008. "Eigenfactor: Does the Principle of Repeated Improvement Result in Better Estimates than Raw Citation Counts?" Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13): 2186-2188. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20943
  13. De Winter, Joost C.F., Amir A. Zadpoor, and Dimitra Dodou. 2014. "The Expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: A Longitudinal Study." Scientometrics, 98: 1547-1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1089-2
  14. Franceschet, Massimo. 2010a. "A Comparison of Bibliometric Indicators for Computer Science Scholars and Journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar." Scientometrics, 83: 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0021-2
  15. Franceschet, Massimo. 2010b. "Ten Good Reasons to Use the Eigenfactor Metrics." Information Processing and Management, 46: 555-558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.001
  16. Garcia-Perez, Miguel A. 2010. "Accuracy and Completeness of Publication and Citation Records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: A Case Study for the Computation of h Indicies in Psychology." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(10): 2070-2085. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21372
  17. Gavel, Ylva and Lars Iselid. 2008. "Web of Science and Scopus: A Journal Title Overlap Study." Online Information Review, 32(1): 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520810865958
  18. Gorraiz, Juan and Christian Schloegl. 2008. "A Bibliographic Analysis of Pharmacology and Pharmacy Journals: Scopus versus Web of Science." Journal of Information Science, 34(5): 715-725. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551507086991
  19. Harzing, Ann-Wil. 2007. Publish or Perish. [online]. [cited 2014.8.23]. .
  20. Harzing, Anne-Wil. 2013. "A Preliminary Test of Google Scholar as a Source for Citation Data: A Longitudinal Study of Nobel Prize Winners." Scientometrics, 94: 1057-1075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0777-7
  21. Harzing, Anne-Wil. 2014. "A Longitudinal Study of Google Scholar Coverage between 2012 and 2013." Scientometrics, 98: 565-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0975-y
  22. Jokic, Maja, Kresimir Zauder, and Srebrenka Letina. 2010. "Croatian Scholarly Productivity 1991-2005 Measured by Journals Indexed in Web of Science." Scientometrics, 83: 375-395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0071-5
  23. Leydesdorff, Loet, Stephen Carley, and Ismael Rafols. 2013. "Global Maps of Science Based on the New Web-of-Science Categories." Scientometrics, 94: 589-593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0784-8
  24. Lopez-Cozar, Eilio Delgado, Nicolas Robinson-Garcia, and Daniel Torres-Salinas. 2014. "The Google Scholar Experiment: How to Index False Papers and Manipulate Bibliometric Indicators." Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3): 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056
  25. Lopez-Illescas, Carmen, Felix de Moya-Anegon, and Henk F. Moed. 2008. "Coverage and Citation Impact of Oncological Journals in the Web of Science and Scopus." Journal of Informetrics, 2(4): 304-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.08.001
  26. Meho, Lokman I. and Yvonne Rogers. 2008. "Citation Counting, Citation Ranking, and h-index of Human-Computer Interaction Researchers: A Comparison of 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.20874
  27. Mikki, Susanne. 2010. "Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for Earth Sciences." Scientometrics, 82: 321-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0038-6
  28. Mingers, John and Evangelia A.E.C.G. Lipitakis. 2010. "Counting the Citations: a Comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the Field of Business and Management." Scientometrics, 85: 613-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0
  29. Ong, Chorng-Shyong, Shu-Chen Chang, and Shwn-Meei Lee. 2013. "Website Satisfaction Dimensions: Factors between Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction." Information Development, 29(4): 299-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666912466400
  30. Ortega, Jose Luis, and Isidro F. Aguillo. 2013. "Institutional and Country Collaboration in an Online Service of Scientific Profiles: Google Scholar Citations." Journal of Informetrics, 7: 394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.007
  31. Thompson Reuters. 2012. Eigenfactor Metrics in JCR Web: Frequently Asked Questions. [online]. [cited 2014.9.7]. .

피인용 문헌

  1. Google Scholar Citation metrics of Pakistani LIS scholars: an overview vol.68, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1108/gkmc-03-2018-0025