Source-linked AI summary
A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers
Junwen Zhu, Weishu Liu
TL;DR
The study examines how Web of Science and Scopus are used in academic papers from 2004 to 2018, using data from the SCIE and SSCI indexes. It finds that both databases are increasingly used, while Scopus challenges Web of Science’s dominance across countries and knowledge domains.
Problem
The study addresses how the use of two competing citation databases, Web of Science and Scopus, has developed across academic research.
Method
Using SCIE and SSCI data, the study conducts a comparative, dynamic, and empirical analysis of WoS- and Scopus-related papers published during 2004–2018.
Results
Both databases are increasingly used, with Scopus challenging WoS’s dominant role; usage spans more countries and knowledge domains, with strong representation in meta-analysis, health and medical science, and Information Science & Library Science.
Takeaways & Limitations
WoS and Scopus have broad and expanding roles in academic research, while China, Brazil, and Iran contribute substantially through differing usage patterns.
Takeaways & Limitations
The topic-field search balances recall and precision but omits studies that mention database sources only in methods sections.
Abstract
from arXiv · showhide
Web of Science and Scopus are two world-leading and competing citation databases. By using the Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, this paper conducts a comparative, dynamic, and empirical study focusing on the use of Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus in academic papers published during 2004 and 2018. This brief communication reveals that although both Web of Science and Scopus are increasingly used in academic papers, Scopus as a new-comer is really challenging the dominating role of WoS. Researchers from more and more countries/regions and knowledge domains are involved in the use of these two databases. Even though the main producers of related papers are developed economies, some developing economies such as China, Brazil and Iran also act important roles but with different patterns in the use of these two databases. Both two databases are widely used in meta-analysis related studies especially for researchers in China. Health/medical science related domains and the traditional Information Science & Library Science field stand out in the use of citation databases.
Data and methods
The study retrieves WoS- and Scopus-related records from SCIE and SSCI for 2004–2018 using topic-field searches and specified database-name queries. The search strategy balances recall and precision but can omit records mentioned only in methods sections and introduce limited noise.
- WoS-related records are retrieved through topic-field searches using Web of Science and three classical citation-index names.
- The analysis covers records published from 2004 to 2018 because Scopus launched in 2004.
- The study conducts a comparative, dynamic, and empirical analysis of WoS and Scopus use in academic papers.
- The data source is limited to the Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index.
- The search strategy balances recall and precision, omitting some records that mention citation databases only in methods sections.
- Keywords Plus may introduce noise, and ambiguous Scopus records were manually excluded.
Analyses
From 2004 to 2018, academic use of both Web of Science and Scopus expanded across countries, knowledge domains, and applications, while Scopus increasingly challenged WoS’s dominance. Meta-analysis, health and medical sciences, and Information Science & Library Science were especially prominent areas of use.
- Database-related papers: 22,648 WoS-related and 12,861 Scopus-related articles and reviews were selected from records published in SCIE and SSCI between 2004 and 2018.The searches identified 22,890 WoS-related records and 12,953 Scopus-related records before exclusions.
- Database-related papers: WoS-related papers increased from 102 in 2004 to 4,932 in 2018, while Scopus-related papers rose from two in 2005 to 3,252 in 2018.The study describes rapid growth for both databases, especially for WoS after 2011.
- Database-related papers: Scopus increasingly challenged WoS’s dominating role as both databases were mentioned more often in academic papers.The paper characterizes Scopus as a newcomer whose use approached that of WoS.
- Countries and regions: China produced 6,938 WoS-related papers (30.6%), while Brazil contributed 1,202 WoS-related and 1,130 Scopus-related papers, and Iran contributed 670 WoS-related and 1,105 Scopus-related papers.China ranked ninth for Scopus-related papers with 737 (5.7%), whereas the USA led Scopus output with 3,093 papers (24.0%).
Conclusion
Using SCIE and SSCI data, the study finds expanding use of WoS and Scopus across countries and knowledge domains, with Scopus challenging WoS’s dominance. Both databases are prominent in meta-analysis and health-related research, while the study’s topic-field search and paper-only scope leave important uses for future investigation.
- Scopus is challenging WoS’s previously dominant role as both databases become increasingly used in academic papers.
- Researchers from more countries and knowledge domains are using WoS and Scopus, although developed economies remain the main contributors.China, Brazil, and Iran contribute substantially but show different usage patterns.
- WoS and Scopus are widely used in meta-analysis-related studies, especially in China, as well as in health/medical science and Information Science & Library Science.
- The study’s topic-field search may omit papers mentioning databases only in methods sections, and deeper content-based analyses and non-paper uses remain for future investigation.The authors also call for classifying database use by purpose and examining policy documents or evaluation practice.