We had a trial and some testing at USQ and found that the BCI did not materially change authors’ h-indices and other impact data, due to the relatively small number of books and book chapters actually covered per author in the index, and also (I think) due to the limited citation data available for each book/book chapter, compared for example with free citation data for the same books on Google Scholar.

I tend to use a freeware program like Harzing’s Publish or Perish, which uses Google Scholar data, for book and book chapter citation metrics.

Pat

Pasquale (Pat) Loria

Research Librarian, Library Services

Global Learning Division

University of Southern Queensland | Toowoomba 4350 QLD Australia

T: +61 7 4631 1778 | Fax: +61 7 4631 1493 | Email: [log in to unmask]

Dear Elizabeth

I am under the impression that publishers had to agree to be part of the Book Index, and – although this was information I heard informally from Thomson 7  or so months ago, Oxford University Press was one of the publishers who had not agreed.

Regards

Barbara

Dear colleagues,

Has anyone had a chance to fully explore the trial to Thomson Reuters Book Citation Index yet?  Academic staff here are curious about TR’s BCI selection criteria.  I know TR have written an essay about this, however, it is unclear where they are sourcing titles against which to apply the criteria in the first place.  And clearly there are a lot more books that meet the criteria than are currently on the BCI – how have they made the decision to exclude?  If anyone has any inside information on this, it would be welcome!

Best wishes

Elizabeth

Elizabeth Gadd BA (Hons) MSc FHEA MCLIP

Academic Services Manager

Library Research Support Co-ordinator

University Library

Loughborough University

Loughborough

Leics

LE11 2FA

Tel: 01509 222342

Fax: 01509 223993