The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis
Open accessAbstract
Bibliometric studies in management and related fields are growing exponentially due to the need to systematize and summarize the growing body of publications. To do so, scholars mostly retrieve publications and metadata from either Scopus or Web of Science. Only a few bibliometric studies merge the two databases to conduct a single integrated analysis. Recent studies demonstrated the benefits of merging data from Scopus and Web of Science and presented methods for the merging. In this paper we build upon a recent method to simplify some of the key steps of merging datasets when using the R package Bibliometrix to perform bibliometric analyses. The result is a user friendly, accessible, three-step method that allows researchers to save time without compromising the integrity of the data, and the analysis. Our method is particularly beneficial for a wider application as it does not require coding skills, and neither proprietary nor shareware software.
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
Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 · Cited by 21,484
bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007 · Cited by 16,064
Promoting an open research culture
Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aab2374 · Cited by 2,708
The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era
Larivière, V., Haustein, S., & Mongeon, P. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127502 · Cited by 1,240
Visser, M., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2021) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00112 · Cited by 865
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
Joksimovic, S., Ifenthaler, D., Marrone, R., De Laat, M., & Siemens, G. (2023) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100138 · Cited by 152
Zhang, M., Tang, E., Ding, H., & Zhang, Y. (2024) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2024_jslhr-24-00157 · Cited by 22
Ali, M., Ma, M., Muneeb, M., & Wong, G. K. W. (2025) · Metrics · doi:10.3390/metrics2040023 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Caputo, A., & Kargina, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Analytics
- Published
- 2021-10-22
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 82-88
- ISSN
- 2050-3318 (ISSN-L)
- 2050-3326
- OpenAlex
- W3210837814
- Cited by
- 289
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 16.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1057/s41270-021-00142-7
- The paper
- Caputo, A., & Kargina, M. (2022). A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis. Journal of Marketing Analytics. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-021-00142-7
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.
