Searching for LIS scholarly publications: A comparison of search results from Google, Google Scholar, EDS, and LISA
Introduction
While conducting research, academics devote a large part of their time to searching for literature. With the expansion of internet resources and the increasing number of academic publications available (Johnson et al., 2018, 26–27), researchers are facing the problem of what source they should start from when searching for scholarly literature. They have many types of information sources to consider: general and academic web search engines, discovery services, bibliographic and citation databases, digital library aggregation services, and academic social networks.
Academic online search engines are becoming an increasingly popular tool in research. Indeed, some studies (Blankstein & Wolff-Eisenberg, 2018; Gardner & Inger, 2018; Hightower & Caldwell, 2010; Kemman et al., 2013; Nicholas et al., 2017) indicate that they are used at the beginning of the process of searching for articles. Conversely, in the last few years, the use of abstracting and indexing databases has decreased, although they are still widely used for commencing bibliographic searches. Moreover, a library catalog is preferred to locate a full-text document (Borrego & Anglada, 2016; Wolff et al., 2016).
In academia, the other most frequently utilized tools are general online search engines and library discovery services (Blankstein & Wolff-Eisenberg, 2018). Library discovery tools are used mainly in the fields of humanities and social and political science (Gardner & Inger, 2018). Notably, these fields also use databases the least. However, librarians prefer professional search databases and library-acquired resources (Gardner & Inger, 2018). They also use WorldCat more often (Flenley, 2016).
Despite this, it cannot be inferred that the researchers' preferred information sources are also the best choice for fulfilling the particular information needs. This may be revealed by comparing the results obtained from various information sources for the same research query. In this context, this study examines the suitability of selected sources from the field of library and information science (LIS). Its purpose is to support LIS researchers in choosing a search system to find the necessary literature.
Four information sources were selected after a preliminary survey: Google, Google Scholar (GS), Ebsco Discovery Service (EDS), and Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA). They were compared based on query results in terms of precision, relative recall, coverage, and full-text access. Undoubtedly, all four examined information sources are popular among researchers of the library and information science. Thus, the findings of the study should be interesting to the field representatives, especially in the context of their own previous experiences.
Three interesting pairs can be discerned within the information sources examined. The first is Google and Google Scholar. According to a recent global survey (Gardner & Inger, 2018, 20) researchers prefer academic search engines to general ones in search of the literature. Google versus GS comparison will show if the results retrieved from both sources are similar and if it is enough to use only the one dedicated to science. The second pair is Google/GS and EDS. Discovery services were developed to compete with web search engines by providing single search access to the library's scattered resources. The direct comparison with the competitors will verify the extent to which these services have met their objectives. The last pair made EDS and LISA. In this case, a single renowned bibliographic database is confronted with one of the web-scale discovery services, which have become popular in academic libraries in recent years. The comparison raises the question if more sources of information always translate into better results.
Section snippets
Problem statement
The problem exists that there is a high selection of databases for LIS researchers to use when conducting exploratory research for scholarly publications on a specific LIS topic. This study aims to discover the information sources most suitable for exploratory searching in terms of effectiveness and content coverage in searching for LIS scholarly publications. It is intended to support academics in the choice of a search system in situations when they start exploring a topic and try to find the
Literature review
For transparency, the literature review comprises four sections that compare different groups of search tools. Notably, numerous studies have compared different academic databases and online search engines.
Selection of information sources
The selection of information sources used for the study was based mainly on the results of a preliminary survey, but other factors also determined the choice. A determination of different types of information sources with their representatives preluded the preliminary survey. The following types of information sources were specified:
- •
general web search engines - Google;
- •
academic web search engines - Google Scholar;
- •
library discovery services - Ebsco Discovery Service;
- •
domain-specific bibliographic
Relevance of search results for individual queries in each topic
Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 present the number of relevant documents and full-text documents (in brackets) retrieved from the four examined systems for each topic, individually for three component queries. Relevant documents which occurred several times on the search results list were counted only once. Information about the duplicates was presented separately in the Duplicates among relevant results section.
As ten elements of the search result list for each query were always examined, the
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to indicate the information sources that are most suitable in terms of effectiveness and coverage in searching for LIS scholarly publications on a specific topic and to support academics in the choice of a search system, when they start exploring a topic trying to find the necessary literature. The preliminary research narrowed the surveyed systems to the four most promising. They represent the categories of information sources that are most often chosen by
Conclusion
The study examined the effectiveness and content coverage of several information sources in the context of exploratory searching for LIS scholarly publications. The findings revealed that in this type of searching, using simple queries, Google performs best in all aspects. The only downside is the lack of duplicate control. Google Scholar was not far behind Google in most measures, but even though the differences were not significant, the advantage of the general web search engine over the one
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Both authors contributed equally to this manuscript.
References (46)
- et al.
Will web search engines replace bibliographic databases in the systematic identification of research?
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
(2017) - et al.
Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the literature
Journal of Informetrics
(2017) - et al.
Investigating queries and search failures in academic search
Information Processing & Management
(2017) - et al.
Online search stopping behaviors: An investigation of query abandonment and task stopping
Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
(2014) - et al.
Is Google scholar really scholarly?
Library Hi Tech News
(2018) - et al.
Paths of discovery: Comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources
College & Research Libraries
(2013) - et al.
An experimental search strategy retrieves more precise results than PubMed and Google for questions about medical interventions
PeerJ
(2015) - et al.
Ithaka S+R US Faculty Survey 2018 | Ithaka S+R
- et al.
Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: Good relative recall and precision are not enough
BMC Medical Research Methodology
(2013) - et al.
A small academic library and the power of EBSCO discovery service
W Serials Review
(2016)