The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysis
Vivek Kumar Singh, Prashasti Singh, Mousumi Karmakar, Jacqueline Leta,, Philipp Mayr

TL;DR
This study compares journal coverage across Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions, revealing significant differences in coverage, with Dimensions being the most comprehensive, and highlights how database choice affects research output analysis.
Contribution
It provides a detailed comparative analysis of the journal coverage of three major scholarly databases using recent master journal lists, highlighting differences and implications.
Findings
Dimensions has the most exhaustive journal coverage.
Web of Science is the most selective database.
Database choice influences research output analysis.
Abstract
Traditionally, Web of Science and Scopus have been the two most widely used databases for bibliometric analyses. However, during the last few years some new scholarly databases, such as Dimensions, have come up. Several previous studies have compared different databases, either through a direct comparison of article coverage or by comparing the citations across the databases. This article attempts to compare the journal coverage of the three databases: Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. The most recent master journal lists of the three databases have been used for the purpose of identifying the overlapping and unique journals covered in the databases. The results indicate that the databases have significantly different journal coverage, with the Web of Science being most selective and Dimensions being the most exhaustive. About 99.11% and 96.61% of the journals indexed in Web of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
