Which source to use for what:
International coverage – Google Scholar and Scopus do a lot more of this than Web of Science.
Non-English language publications – Scopus and to some extent Google Scholar. This is a known weakness of Web of Science.
Interdisciplinary areas – Scopus and Google Scholar. This is a known weakness of Web of Science.
“High-impact” publications – Web of Science.
Peer reviewed journals – Scopus and Web of Science. GS known to cover a lot of non-reviewed.
Non-journal coverage – Google Scholar has more unique types of materials (PDF files, Word docs, technical reports, theses and dissertations, etc.). Web of Science and Scopus both have “some” proceedings and books but they are mainly covering journal articles.
Book coverage – Google Scholar excels at this way more than the others as it covers Google Books content.
Authors with common names – Scopus and Web of Science can easily help distinguish between similar author names.
|Features||Scopus||Web of Science||Google Scholar|
|Number of journals||19,809||12,331||Unknown|
|Proceedings||5.3 million||110,000 (only ones that were published in journals)||Unknown|
|Focus||Physical sciences, health sciences, life sciences, social sciences||Science, technology, social sciences, arts and humanities||All subject areas|
|Export records||Yes - en masse||Yes - en masse||Yes - en masse if you mark records which saves to My Library - then export from within My Library|
|Export reports||Robust - many options||Copy/Paste only||Copy/Paste only|
Disclaimer: Web of Science coverage in this chart refers to the Web of Science Core Collection (including Conference Proceedings Citation Index, Book Citation Index, and Century of Science which are all separately purchasable components).
Credits: Table modified from Scopus vs. Web of Science Comparison Chart (with permission ofUniv of Washington Health Sciences Library), information from the ADAT Database Comparison Tool, and the HLWIKI Canada page with comparison information.