The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study
Open accessAbstract
Scientific research builds on previous studies and scientifically proven knowledge. Researchers must master the recent developments in the field when designing research to answer new questions. Today, the accessibility of research literature is abundant due to digitized publications, extensive coverage of citation indexes, and several literature databases. The means for conducting systematic literature reviews have greatly improved. In recent years, a lot of research with methods, such as systematic literature reviews, literature mapping, and visualizing studies, has been published. Despite the tools having been perfected, they still have limitations. Particularly, database selection for a literature search sets a bias, because the citation indexes differ in coverage according to the scientific domain. In this paper, bibliometric data from two citation indexes (Web of Science and Scopus) are combined for the purposes of bibliometric analyses in the context of inter-firm relationships. The combination process requires a lot of unifying and repairing of data in practice that is referred as data wrangling. This study describes the process steps and the lessons learned and considers the amount of effort required.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00375 · Cited by 15,386
The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255632 · Cited by 9,943
Developing buyer-seller relationships
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298705100202 · Cited by 9,139
The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5 · Cited by 5,274
Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships
Ring, P. S., & van de Ven, A. H. (1994) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258836 · Cited by 4,914
The SAGE handbook of organizational research methods
Buchanan, D., & Bryman, A. E. (2009) · Cited by 2,123
An Integrated Model of Buyer-Seller Relationships
Wilson, D. T. (1995) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/009207039502300414 · Cited by 2,062
Buyer–Seller Relationships in Business Markets
Cannon, J. P., & Perreault, W. D. (1999) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379903600404 · Cited by 1,755
The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple‐perspective cocitation analysis
Chen, C., Ibekwe‐SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21309 · Cited by 1,585
The Development of Buyer‐Seller Relationships in Industrial Markets
Ford, D. (1980) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/eum0000000004910 · Cited by 1,298
Cited by
Kulkov, I., Kulkova, J., Rohrbeck, R., Menvielle, L., Kaartemo, V., & Makkonen, H. (2024) · Sustainable Development · doi:10.1002/sd.2773 · Cited by 420
Ali, M., Ma, M., Muneeb, M., & Wong, G. K. W. (2025) · Metrics · doi:10.3390/metrics2040023 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Kumpulainen, M., & Seppänen, M.
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2022-08-25
- Volume
- 127
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 5613-5631
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W4293242947
- Cited by
- 259
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 25.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7
- The paper
- Kumpulainen, M., & Seppänen, M. (2022). Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.