This study evaluates the content coverage of Google Scholar and three commercial databases (Arts & Humanities Citation Index, Bibliography of the History of Art and Art Full Text/Art Index Retrospective) on the subject of art history. Each database is tested using a bibliography method and evaluated based on Péter Jacsó’s scope criteria for online databases. Of the 472 articles tested, Google Scholar indexed the smallest number of citations (35%), outshone by the Arts & Humanities Citation Index which covered 73% of the test set. This content evaluation also examines specific aspects of coverage to find that in comparison to the other databases, Google Scholar provides consistent coverage over the time range tested (1975-2008) and considerable access to article abstracts (56%). Google Scholar failed, however, to fully index the most frequently cited art periodical in the test set, the Artforum International. Finally, Google Scholar’s total citation count is inflated by a significant percentage (23%) of articles which include duplicate, triplicate or multiple versions of the same record.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UNC_CH/oai:etd.ils.unc.edu:1901/499 |
| Date | 2008 April 1900 |
| Creators | Hannah M. Noll |
| Contributors | Jeffrey Pomerantz |
| Publisher | School of Information and Library Science |
| Source Sets | University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Theses and Dissertations |
| Format | application/pdf, 303034 bytes, application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds