Research Productivity of Science Academics - A Webometrics Analysis

Basavaraja M T


The study aims to know the research productivity of science academics as reflected in the database of Google Scholar. Based on the number of articles and citations, the research productivity has been measured. The h-index, i-10 index of the science academics are also considered to measure the research productivity. The result of the study found that only 25.19% science faculty members have created their Google Scholar my citation account. The study also found that among the faculty members, S. K. Sarangi has received 4479 citations for his 199 articles which are included in the database; his h-index and i10-index 36 and 74 respectively and thus he stands in the first place in the ranked list. The study also reveals that the Department of Mathematics has the highest average h-index (6) and average i10 index (11.12). 


Research productivity, Science academics, Google Scholar, Bangalore University

Full Text:



Adams, Jonathan, Christopher King, and Vingh Singh. “Global research report: India.” Leeds, UK: Thomson & Reuters(2009).

Sinha. India accounts for just 3.5% of global research output. 2016. Retrieved from http://timesofindia.

Padma TV. India’s science test. Nature 2015; 521(7551): 144.

Bauer, Kathleen, and NisaBakkalbasi. “An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment.” D-Lib magazine (2005).

Bakkalbasi, Nisa, Kathleen Bauer, Janis Glover, and Lei Wang. “Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science.” Biomedical digital libraries 2006; 3(1): 7.

Neuhaus, Chris, Ellen Neuhaus, Alan Asher, and Clint Wrede. “The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: An empirical study.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 2006; 6(2): 127-141.

Bar-Ilan J. An ego-centric citation analysis of the works of Michael O. Rabin based on multiple citation indexes. Information Processing & Management 2006; 42(6): 1553-66

Bar-Ilan J, Levene M, Lin A. Some measures for comparing citation databases. Journal of Informetrics 2007; 1(1), 26-34.

Meho LI, Yang K. Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(13): 2105-25.

Kousha K, Thelwall M. Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(7): 105565. 11. Norris, Michael, and Charles Oppenheim. “Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature.” Journal of informetrics 2007;1(2): 161-169.

Walters, William H. “Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field.” Information processing & management 2007; 43(4): 1121-1132. 13. Kousha K, Thelwall M. Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics2008; 74(2): 273-94.

Gavel Y, Iselid L. Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study. Online Information Review 2008; 32(1), 8-21.

Visser, M. S., and H. F. Moed. “Comparing Web of Science and Scopus on a paper-by-paper basis.” In Excellence and emergence. A new challenge for the combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, pp. 23-25. 2008.

Lopez-Illescas, Carmen, Félix de Moya-Anegón, and Henk F. Moed. “Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus.” Journal of Informetrics 2008; 2(4): 304-316.

Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I et al. Author self-citation in the general medicine literature. PLoS One2011; 6(6): e20885.

Meho LI, Sugimoto CR. Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies: A tale of two citation databases— Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology2009; 60(12): 2499-2508.

Mingers J, Lipitakis EA. Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics2010; 85(2): 613-25.

Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics2016; 106(1): 213-28.


  • There are currently no refbacks.