1. Scopus and I Scopus and I: confessions of a user Tefko Saracevic, PhD School of Communication, Information and Library Studies Rutgers University tefko@scils.rutgers.edu http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~tefko Tefko Saracevic, PhD School of Communication, Information and Library Studies Rutgers University tefko@scils.rutgers.edu http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~tefko

2. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic2 Full disclosure I have no connection with Scopus –But: I am on Scopus Advisory Board & as such have a free password –but I & you have Scopus access through Rutgers Library Of two so far, I participated at one Scopus Advisory Board meeting (Budapest) and evaluated their product informally over phone conversations I am not going to the next meeting – Bangkok I gave an informal talk about using Scopus at 2006 ALA I have no connection with Scopus –But: I am on Scopus Advisory Board & as such have a free password –but I & you have Scopus access through Rutgers Library Of two so far, I participated at one Scopus Advisory Board meeting (Budapest) and evaluated their product informally over phone conversations I am not going to the next meeting – Bangkok I gave an informal talk about using Scopus at 2006 ALA

3. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic3 What you can’t find on Scopus Hamerkop, Scopus umbretta Named after:

4. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic4 Overview Elsevier effort to get into searching  & combining ScienceDirect & Scirus (web searching) Massive effort & outlay; big marketing  development investment HUGE & undisclosed Headed by Eefka Smit & a young Dutch team  global operations:  Hdq: Amsterdam; marketing: Amsterdam, London, NY; indexing: Philippines; computers: Dayton, Ohio Unveiled in 2004  new features unveiled constantly – innovative  e.g. mid 2005: added RefWorks; end 2005 Citation tracking: 2006 planed Author profiling & further analysis tools Search engine licensed from Fast

5. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic5 Coverage Science & technology only, no humanities  includes social sciences (with library & information science), life sciences Covers some 15,000 journals, 750 proceedings, patents  also strong in non-English & developing country sources  incorporates wall to wall Medline, Embase, Compendex, & many other databases  also web search via Scirus Time covered: For most is 1996 - ; for others goes back (e.g. as Medline) While having gaps coverage seems more comprehensive than any other single database

6. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic6 What can you do? Subjects search  with many capabilities to limit & modify, rank Source search – journals, types of sources Author search with many extensions  – e.g. as to citations to and from Citation tracking Integrated with getting full texts with library Integrated with RefWorks, given library has it Integrated web search

7. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic7 What do you see? At first: Lots of features laid out all at once But, relatively clear interface laying out capabilities Geared toward fast, intuitive learning & use  and indeed it is relatively easy to learn & use Results displayed in LIFO order, but can be ranked

8. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic8 Reviews Comparing Scopus and Web of Science  2005: http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43  2006: http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43  critical of Scopus gaps in coverage, particularly before 1996  but not clear why comparison of these two services  Scopus does many different things that WoS does not & vice versa  both have citation searching but Scopus has much more  Scopus subject searching is much more comprehensive, WoS citation searching is more comprehensive

9. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic9 search options

10. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic10 search selections

11. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic11 But lets get going …. Live examples from http://www.scopus.com/ user: tsaracevic password: I am not telling or: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/

12. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic12 One of my uses of citation tracking Presently, I am writing a comprehensive review about the notion of relevance in information science  for that I searched for some key authors  including, of course, a vanity search  then I saved each author in a list  then – well lets look

13. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic13 My four saved lists

14. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic14 then… I selected and viewed the list “Mizzaro citations” to work on them further selected them all clicked on citation tracking and voila!

15. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic15 Selected them all for citation overview

16. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic16 Intereste d in this one

17. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic17 Follow-up on four Tombros NEW!

18. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic18 Following a vanity but useful trail Created a similar list of my own articles Selected two on relevance Who cited them? Who cited them who cited me? Discovered a number of previously unknown articles Here we go:

19. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic19 This one

20. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic20 Relevance subject search Selected 50+ articles on relevance Created a list & saved in My lists Did citation tracking Followed up on highly cited articles Had fun tracking those that cited them that cited them Eventually got lost in the tracking maze – of course!

21. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic21

22. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic22 Which ones cited most?

23. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic23 Tracking a single article Barry C.L., Schamber L. Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A cross-situational comparison 1998, Information Processing and Management, (2-3) 219-236 Barry C.L.Schamber L. Tracked citations in Scopus And in Web of Science

24. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic24 Cited 33 times in Scopus I followed up on the citations – cited even in: Evaluating research for use in practice: What criteria do specialist nurses use? Journal of Advanced Nursing 50 (3), pp. 235-243

25. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic25 and the winner is? For Barry & Schamber 1998 article:  Scopus: 34 citations  Web of Science: 31 citations Oh well … Were they the same articles? Degree of overlap?  Overlap: 27 documents  Scopus had 7 that WoS did not  WoS had 4 that Scopus did not

26. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic26 Editorial uses I use citation tracking as editor of the journal Information Processing & Management: –find [good] referees – most important function for any editor who did what in this area/topic, how cited –subject layout of the topic of the paper –tracking of author’s own work –self-plagiarism? I use citation tracking as editor of the journal Information Processing & Management: –find [good] referees – most important function for any editor who did what in this area/topic, how cited –subject layout of the topic of the paper –tracking of author’s own work –self-plagiarism?

27. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic27 Citation versus subject searching Each follows a different path for retrieval Studies show that each retrieves different documents –low overlap between what is retrieved As a rule, when doing serious searching I do both Citation searching/tracking also serves different purposes –mapping of an area/topic and author –also used fofr assessing impact Each follows a different path for retrieval Studies show that each retrieves different documents –low overlap between what is retrieved As a rule, when doing serious searching I do both Citation searching/tracking also serves different purposes –mapping of an area/topic and author –also used fofr assessing impact

28. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic28 What is not there but I would LOVE it Elimination of self-citations –cannot do it in Web of Science either, but can in Dialog in a convoluted way Graphical display of connections –add visualization, network maps Longer years back –Web of Science also has limitation on years depending on subscription rate going back from 1994 costs gazillion dollars – Rutgers does not have it Elimination of self-citations –cannot do it in Web of Science either, but can in Dialog in a convoluted way Graphical display of connections –add visualization, network maps Longer years back –Web of Science also has limitation on years depending on subscription rate going back from 1994 costs gazillion dollars – Rutgers does not have it

29. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic29 Conclusions Actually, I do not have any But citation tracking beside being serious business is also fun! So have fun! Actually, I do not have any But citation tracking beside being serious business is also fun! So have fun!

30. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic30 He was the biggest polymath ever – maybe he envisioned Scopus?

31. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic31 images …

32. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic32 images …

33. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic33 and of course…

34. Scopus and I © Tefko Saracevic34