The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases
Open accessAbstract
Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics.
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
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770
Burnham, J. F. (2006) · Biomedical Digital Libraries · doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-1 · Cited by 1,287
Kulkarni, A. V. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1307 · Cited by 817
Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006) · Biomedical Digital Libraries · doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7 · Cited by 752
Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar
Bar-Ilan, J. (2008) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y · Cited by 728
Measuring Contextual Citation Impact of Scientific Journals
Moed, H. F. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002 · Cited by 628
A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university
Vieira, E. S., & Gomes, J. A. N. F. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-2178-0 · Cited by 604
Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor
Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.08-107938 · Cited by 555
Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals
Bergstrom, C. (2007) · College & Research Libraries News · doi:10.5860/crln.68.5.7804 · Cited by 461
Cited by
Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World
Pranckutė, R. (2021) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications9010012 · Cited by 2,696
The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysis
Singh, V. K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J., & Mayr, P. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5 · Cited by 2,342
Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022 · Cited by 1,015
Spante, M., Hashemi, S. S., Lundin, M., & Algers, A. (2018) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2018.1519143 · Cited by 832
Gusenbauer, M. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5 · Cited by 687
Metadata
- Authors
- Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ebrahim, N. A.
- Venue
- Asian Social Science
- Published
- 2013-04-27
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- ISSN
- 1911-2017 (ISSN-L)
- 1911-2025
- OpenAlex
- W2145535121
- Cited by
- 1,925
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 19.72
- 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: A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
- The paper
- Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ebrahim, N. A. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
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.
