User Tools

Site Tools



This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

teaching:general-interest-and-scholarly-databases [2019/01/25 15:51] (current)
seanburns created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +# General-Interest and Scholarly Databases
 +## Introduction
 +Hi Class, this week we are going to examine general interest and scholarly
 +databases. In this video I'm going to walk us through three databases:
 +*Factiva*, which is our general-interest news and online web database and *Web
 +of Science* and *Google Scholar*, which are our two scholarly, citation
 +databases. In particular, these two databases are citation databases. ​
 +We're reading chapters 1 and 2 from Knott, and I will ask a question on the
 +discussion board related to chapter 2. Knott covers specific databases in these
 +two chapters, and UK has some of these databases, so you should explore them.
 +However, I want to take this opportunity to cover databases that are not
 +reviewed in these chapters, with the purpose of exposing us to a greater number
 +of really good sources.
 +## Factiva
 +So, this is *Factiva*. This is a Dow-Jones owned database, and it's really good
 +for news articles, market and company activity, and business related
 +information. Like other databases that we've covered this semester, you can set
 +up search alerts, saved searches, and more. 
 +You can search against subjects, industries, within regions, and you can add
 +other limits, and there are a slew of some advanced search operators that will
 +help power up your search. One bonus is this thing called the Query Genius,
 +which you can see up in the top right. I'll share with you a list of operators
 +and field codes to use when searching here and also demonstrate how to use
 +Let's say I'm interested in any news about Google and open source software. To
 +search this in Factiva, I can approach the query simply, like so:
 +  "open source"​ AND google ​
 +This search was conducted on Feb 6, 2018, and you can see there are 2,560
 +results. ​
 +On the left side you can see a distribution of articles by date of publication,​
 +a list of relevant companies that appear in the documents that were retrieved,
 +as well as lists of sources, subjects, industries, languages, regions, and so
 +If I wanted to export any of these documents, I can click on specific check
 +boxes and export the results in various ways, either as an RTF or a PDF file,
 +or have it email the results to me or print them. We can look at the
 +publication data distribution and note whether there are more results on a
 +given day than on others. This may suggest a hot news day for this particular
 +topic and so that may be something we want to explore. ​
 +Let's go back to the search builder. Say I found that the previous set of
 +results were rather hit or miss and, as a result, ​ I want to refine my search a
 +bit more. Now I can try the adjacent operator. The adjacent operator tells the
 +database to only return documents where the terms appear within a set amount of
 +space between each other. The assumption is that the closer any terms are to
 +each other, the more likely the document will be about those terms. Thus, if I
 +  "open source"​ adj5 google
 +I'm saying that I want the term "open source"​ to appear within five words of
 +the term "​google",​ and I'm doing this because I expect that the list of results
 +will be more hit than miss on this topic.
 +You can see that the results are much different than the previous one. Here I
 +only have 128 results rather than 2,597. If we investigate any of these
 +documents, you and confirm that our two terms, which are highlighted,​ appear
 +within five words of each other.
 +There are many operators in Factiva, but unless we're familiar with them, it's
 +hard to remember all of them, and the documentation isn't all that great,
 +unfortunately. But we can learn about them with a little digging and elbow
 +grease, and in the discussion forum for today, I'm sharing with you a list of
 +operators to use and a list of field tags. Remember, search operators are the
 +parts of a query that deal with the logic of a query. Thus, a Boolean NOT
 +operator tells a search system to not include some term. A field tag refers to
 +the metadata of a source -- that is, some part of a source that's fixed and
 +described, like a source title, date, etc.
 +There are many more search operators in *Factiva*, like there are in other
 +databases. Here's the page that lists them. In addition to the *adjN* operator,
 +there are the standard Boolean operators, which you can use as lower case in
 +*Factiva*, as well as other kinds, like the *nearN* operator, which works like
 +the *adjN* operator but is bi-directional. That means the order of terms in our
 +query doesn'​t matter, like it does in the use of the *adjN* operator. For
 +example, if I do this:
 +  "open source"​ near5 google
 +Then I'm telling the system that I will accept documents or results where the
 +term "open source"​ is placed within five words before or after the term
 +"​Google"​. But if I use the *adjN* operator, then I'm implying a specific
 +direction. That is:
 +"open source"​ adj5 google
 +means I'm telling the system that the term "​google"​ must come after the term
 +"open source"​ and also must be placed within five words of each other. By
 +  google adj5 "open source"​
 +implies that order.
 +There'​s a lot more to *Factiva*. E.g., if I want to acquire more information
 +about a company, then I'd want to click on the Companies/​Markets link at the
 +top and do a search. Here's a search for Google. I can also follow the same
 +kind of steps for industries.
 +You can use *Factiva* by going to the UK Libraries website, clicking on the
 +Databases tab, and searching for *Factiva*. If you're want a place to read the
 +news everyday, this is a good option too. It doesn'​t simply have to be a source
 +for searching for news articles when you need them.
 +## Web of Science
 +*Web of Science* is an abstract, indexing, and citation database. What this
 +means is that it's a database that does not provide access to full text
 +sources, like full text articles, but only to information about the articles,
 +like titles, abstracts, publications,​ and so forth. That's a big limitation, in
 +some ways, because often we want something right now when we search for it, but
 +it's fine, because we can usually get a full text copy of a work that we're
 +interested in. I'll show you how in a second.
 +*Web of Science* is also, as mentioned, a citation database. Whenever a scholar
 +cites another work, such as an article or a book, the citation database tracks
 +that citation and uses it to connect the two works together: the citing work
 +and the cited work. Having this citation link available to us provides us with
 +a great information retrieval tool.
 +Why? It turns out that this development provides a great opportunity to
 +retrieve articles that are like each other, and like each other in some way. In
 +fact, Google'​s PageRank algorithm, the algorithm that judges relevance based on
 +links to a page, is based on this citation idea.
 +The reason this works is because when one author cites another work, it's often
 +the case that the citation is given because there'​s a connection of some sort
 +between the two works. That is, when we cite a work, we don't just cite
 +randomly or for just any reason or for no reason at all; rather, we cite
 +because there'​s either a topical connection, a methodological connection, or
 +some other type of connection to the previous work. 
 +For example, if I'm conducting research on search engines and am writing a
 +paper about this research, then it's highly likely that I will cite other
 +research that is also on search engines. That's a topical connection. Or, if I
 +am doing this research but I'm gathering data using interviews with people who
 +use search engines, then I may cite other research on the method of
 +interviewing. That's a methodological connection.
 +A citation database doesn'​t tell us anything about why two or more articles are
 +connected to each other through citations, it simply tells us that there is a
 +link. Since it provides that link, it's up to us to follow it and use the
 +bibliographic information (author names, title, abstract, etc.) to determine if
 +the citation connection resulted in a new find that is relevant to our
 +information needs. ​
 +Let's see how this works. I'm in *Web of Science*. Again, to find this, go to
 +UK Libraries, click on databases, and do a search for either *Web of Science*
 +or *Web of Knowledge*, which is another name.
 +The Core Collection is the default collection/​database. This is *Web of
 +Sciences* main database. It's big but it's also curated---only journals that
 +are considered really important by the owners of this platform make it to this
 +database. WoS offers other databases and I can either choose among them or I
 +can search all of them. Note that if I search against all of them that the
 +results will be less precise since a number of these databases cover different
 +areas, including biology, ecology, medicine and health, and so on. If you
 +change the database, some of these search options change.
 +Let's try a search. We can try our open source and Google search:
 +  "open source"​ AND google
 +We'll select the TOPIC field, which means our search scans the 
 +titles, abstracts, and keywords in the fields. Here are our 
 +results. This search was conducted on Mar 6, 2018, and we get 491 
 +documents returned. If I scroll down, I can add some limits to 
 +narrow these results down a bit. E.g., I can limit by publication ​
 +year, by *Web of Science Categories*,​ by Document Type, and so 
 +Let's say that my search is a bit too broad still and I want to 
 +narrow first by refining my query. Just like in *Factiva*, *Web 
 +of Science* offers a proximity operator called NEAR. Let's try it 
 +out with the following query:
 +  "open source"​ NEAR/5 google ​
 +Now there are only 93 results, and if I examine the abstract, ​
 +I'll see that the term "​google"​ is placed within five words of 
 +the term "open source"​ somewhere in the title, abstract, or 
 +keywords of the record. If I want to really narrow down my 
 +search, I can change the field to Title only. Here you can see 
 +that I only get two results back.
 +The default results list is to show articles that are published ​
 +more recently. I can change this default sorting method so that 
 +WoS sorts based on sources that have the highest citations first. ​
 +Once I do this, I can go to the right side, and look at the Times 
 +Cited link and see which articles have been cited the most. This 
 +is what makes WoS a citation database. We don't have to use WoS
 +as a citation database, but this is what really separates WoS 
 +from many other scholarly databases.
 +Theoretically,​ each one of these citing articles should be 
 +related to the article that is cited by them. I can them peruse ​
 +these citing articles to help me find, perhaps, even more 
 +relevant sources of information.
 +Instead of basic search, we can search by author, cited 
 +reference, and more. If you click on the help button in WoS, 
 +you'll find a guide on how to use WoS. The guide includes some 
 +tips on the use of various search operators, including the *near* ​
 +operator as well as the Boolean operators. ​
 +Remember that *Web of Science* doesn'​t offer direct access to 
 +content, but notice that there'​s this **View Now** link. This 
 +link is connected to UK Libraries'​ databases and if the article ​
 +is available, we can get it directly. If not, then we can request ​
 +it through interlibrary loan. Also, in some cases there'​s also a 
 +link to look up the full text in Google Scholar.
 +## Google Scholar
 +Let's try *Google Scholar* now. *Google Scholar* doesn'​t have the 
 +great search operators that either *Factiva* or *Web of Science* ​
 +has, but it's also a citation database and it's free to use. So 
 +let's repeat our search but lose the near operator because GS 
 +won't know what that means:
 +  "open source"​ google
 +You can see here we get a lot of results. Maybe even too much. If 
 +we want to limit our results, we have to use other tricks. The 
 +most common one is simply to add more specific keywords to our 
 +query. E.g., of I add "​Android"​ to the query, that reduces the 
 +There is an advanced search option. It's not as advanced as 
 +something you'd find in the previous two databases, but it is 
 +Other than that, one of the nice things about *Google Scholar* is 
 +that it's also a citation database. You can see the **Cited by 
 +N** link just below each result. That's there if something has 
 +been cited, and I can click on that to follow citations. This is 
 +super helpful.
 +The reason *Google Scholar* returns so many more results is 
 +because it casts a bigger net than something like *Web of 
 +Science* does, which purposefully casts a smaller net. Because of 
 +that, I find *Google Scholar* is kind of nice for browsing works 
 +and for discovery, but that *Web of Science* is better for really ​
 +rigorous and methodical literature searches.
 +The observant among you may have noticed that when I'm searching ​
 +*Google Scholar* there'​s also a link to **View Now @ UK** option. ​
 +This is something you have to set up, but it's pretty simple to 
 +do. Just click on settings, and then go to **Library Links**, and 
 +then search for the University of Kentucky. Be sure that you'​re ​
 +signed into Google if you want to save this as a preference. ​
 +After that, you should see the View Now option when something is 
 +available via UK Libraries.
 +There are some basic filters -- I can filter by articles (which ​
 +also includes books) as well as case law. I can limit to dates or 
 +sort by date, and I can create search alerts (which we've already ​
 +covered). If I click on the Cite button, I can bring up a box to 
 +show how to format my reference according to various styles. If I 
 +click on the Cited by link, I can retrieve the articles that are 
 +citing documents, and I by clicking on Search within citing ​
 +articles, I can add terms and search within those results.
 +## Conclusion
 +All right. That covers *Factiva*, *Web of Science*, and *Google ​
 +Scholar*. *Factiva* is a general-interest news database, and WoS 
 +and GS are both citation, scholarly databases.
 +I'll raise a question on the discussion board that comes from our 
 +Knott reading. See you there.
teaching/general-interest-and-scholarly-databases.txt ยท Last modified: 2019/01/25 15:51 by seanburns