On the trail of opinions on Google Scholar, I next went to the CrossRef stand, where I talked with Ed Pentz, CrossRef’s executive director.
He noted the original 9 publishers who first participated in the CrossRef Google pilot starting last July have grown to 29. Among them are such leaders as Blackwell, Springer-Verlag, Taylor & Francis, American Physical Society, IEEE, and Wiley (see below). Open Access publisher BioMed Central is also in the pilot. And 3.4 million research articles are available via the interface (accessed from the sites of participating publishers).
That’s CrossRef Google, but what about Google Scholar?
Is everything from CrossRef publishers automatically included?
Nope, said Pentz, “Google Scholar is a whole separate crawling, indexing and searching operation.”
“Google Scholar’s set of materials is somewhat,” and Pentz seemed to be implying inexplicably, “different.”
“Clearly,” he said, “Users like cross-disciplinary full-text search through the Google interface. But Google Scholar is pointing to a separate set of ‘scholarly’ materials.”
What’s lacking? I asked.
He noted that Google Scholar is “not comprehensive, the links may not be persistent, and it’s not necessarily clear which is the authoritative copy.”
Should the DOI foundation get more involved with the Google Scholar effort?
“Well,” Pentz said, “we want to engage actively with Google.”
ITI VP, Content