An evidence-based review of academic web search engines, 2014-2016: Implications for librarians' practice and research agenda

30Citations
Citations of this article
123Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Academic web search engines have become central to scholarly research. While the fitness of Google Scholar for research purposes has been examined repeatedly, Microsoft Academic and Google Books have not received much attention. Recent studies have much to tell us about Google Scholar's coverage of the sciences and its utility for evaluating researcher impact. But other aspects have been understudied, such as coverage of the arts and humanities, books, and non-Western, non-English publications. User research has also tapered off. A small number of articles hint at the opportunity for librarians to become expert advisors concerning scholarly communication made possible or enhanced by these platforms. This article seeks to summarize research concerning Google Scholar, Google Books, and Microsoft Academic from the past three years with a mind to informing practice and setting a research agenda. Selected literature from earlier time periods is included to illuminate key findings and to help shape the proposed research agenda, especially in understudied areas.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fagan, J. C. (2017, June 1). An evidence-based review of academic web search engines, 2014-2016: Implications for librarians’ practice and research agenda. Information Technology and Libraries. American Library Association. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v36i2.9718

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free