The pros and cons of Microsoft Academic Search from a bibliometric perspective
| Pages | 983-997 |
| Date | 29 November 2011 |
| Published date | 29 November 2011 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111210788 |
| Author | Péter Jacsó |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
SAVVY SEARCHING
The pros and cons of Microsoft
Academic Search from a
bibliometric perspective
Pe
´ter Jacso
´
University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to look at the pros and cons of Microsoft Academic Search (MAS) from a
bibliometric perspective.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper describes the major content and software features of
MAS, and its shortcomings.
Findings – The paper recommends some further enhancements, and the use of care and caution
when interpreting the metrics produced by cited reference enhanced databases, especially those
created on the basis of the idea of autonomous citation indexing.
Originality/value – The paper reveals pros and cons of MAS. A free bibliometric service is a project
of great interest to those interested in metrics-based research performance evaluation.
Keywords Search engines,Bibliographic systems, Open access,Usage statistics
Paper type General review
Microsoft substantially enhanced Microsoft Academic Search (MAS), its open access
academic search engine, in the middle of 2011, but it needs to eliminate some content
and software limitations to become a comprehensive and univer sal tool for
bibliometric/scientometric/informetric analysis of the research performance of
individuals, groups, and institutions and for the rating and ranking of journals,
conference proceedings and books in all disciplines. It was found that MAS had an
h-index of 1,088 for its 27.2 million records, indicating that are 1,088 records that have
been cited by the other sources covered in MAS at least 1,088 times. For comparison:
the h-index of Scopus is 1,810 for its 45.9 million records, and the h-index of Web of
Science (WoS) for its 50.5 million records is 2,130. Considering that the Microsoft Asia
Research Group is expanding the source coverage of MAS at a very fast pace, and is
extending it to several other disciplinary areas, this free bibliometric service is a project
of great interest to those interested in metrics-based research performance evaluation.
This paper describes the major content and software features of MAS, and its
shortcomings, recommends some further enhancements, and the use of care and
caution when interpreting the metrics produced by cited reference enhanced databases,
especially those created on the basis of the idea of autonomous citation indexing.
Context
Microsoft has been trying for five years to compete with Google Scholar and some
other academic search engines and cited reference enhanced traditional databases. It
entered the game rather late, in 1996 (Carlson, 2006), and its first efforts were
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1468-4527.htm
The pros and
cons of MAS
983
Online Information Review
Vol. 35 No. 6, 2011
pp. 983-997
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1468-4527
DOI 10.1108/14684521111210788
To continue reading
Request your trial