To conduct a bibliometric analysis, several researchers retrieve publications from Scopus or/and Web of Science (WOS) databases. When these scholars consider both Scopus and WOS databases, they mostly make two bibliometric analysis: one from Scopus database and the other from WOS database. A few researchers merge the two databases to conduct a single analysis, but they do not specify how they did it. This paper aims to advance the bibliometric analysis by addressing two points. First, this research claims that making a bibliometric analysis that takes information from Scopus or/and separately from WOS cannot give a broader view of knowledge and tendencies in a field. To prove this claim, we retrieve papers from Scopus and WOS databases to make a bibliometric analysis of sales force literature that covers from 1912 to 2019. Results show that there are many disparities between WOS and merged database, and between this latter and WOS database regarding bibliometric analyses, especially among primary productive authors, the most influential papers, and keyword occurrences. Second, this research proposes a four-step procedure that merges these two databases to allow more reliable bibliometric analyses. This procedure was explicitly shown by using the bibliometric analysis of sales force literature during 1912–2019.

中文翻译：

---

为什么和如何在文献计量分析中合并Scopus和Web of Science：1912年至2019年的销售人员文献案例

为了进行文献计量分析，一些研究人员从Scopus或/和Web of Science（WOS）数据库检索出版物。当这些学者同时考虑Scopus数据库和WOS数据库时，他们大多进行两种文献计量分析：一种来自Scopus数据库，另一种来自WOS数据库。一些研究人员将两个数据库合并以进行单个分析，但是他们没有指定如何进行分析。本文旨在通过解决两点来推动文献计量分析。首先，这项研究声称进行文献计量分析时，如果要从Scopus或/和WOS分别获取信息，则不能提供对该领域知识和趋势的更广阔视野。为了证明这一说法，我们从Scopus和WOS数据库中检索了论文，对1912年至2019年的销售人员文献进行了文献计量分析。结果表明，在文献计量分析方面，WOS与合并数据库之间，以及后者与WOS数据库之间存在许多差异，特别是在主要生产性作者，最具影响力的论文和关键词出现之间。其次，这项研究提出了一个四步程序，将这两个数据库合并在一起，可以进行更可靠的文献计量分析。通过对1912-2019年期间的销售人员文献进行文献计量分析，可以清楚地显示此过程。