ETD Visibility: A study on the exposure of Indian ETDs to the Google Scholar crawler.

Weideman, M.

Proceedings of The 18th International Symposium on Theses and Dissertations. 2-4 November. New Delhi, India.

Weideman, M. 2015. ETD Visibility: A study on the exposure of Indian ETDs to the Google Scholar crawler. Proceedings of The 18th International Symposium on Theses and Dissertations. 2-4 November. New Delhi, India.

ABSTRACT
Electronic theses and dissertations are often stored and made accessible by universities, as a means of disseminating research results to a wide audience. Google Scholar provides an index separate from the Google index, and strives to provide results filtered for scholarly users. This research will determine to what degree a sample of online theses from Indian universities are indexed by Google Scholar. A sample of theses currently stored in the repositories of some Indian universities has been taken from Shodhganga. Search queries were then constructed for each thesis. These queries were executed on Google Scholar, and results recorded. None of the full-text PDF content pages from Shodhganga were indexed by Google Scholar, although some metadata was indexed. In one case, the thesis full-text was indexed, but it was hosted on a university website. Recommendations include that the Shodhganga database be restructured according to the guidelines, to enable Google Scholar to index its contents. Also, the practice of storing one thesis as a number of separate files works against the achievement of high visibility. Since open access to research publications is becoming the norm rather than the exception, scholars are expected to ensure that their publications enjoy a high degree of global visibility. This study has measured the visibility of a small sample of research publications, proved that it is virtually nonexistent, and provided guidelines to improve the situation. This is a unique approach, and according to the literature survey, has not been done before.
REFERENCES
  1. Ahmed, A., Alreyaee, S., & Rahman, A. (2014). Theses and dissertations in institutional repositories: an Asian perspective. New Library World, 115(9/10), 438-451.
  2. Ahmed, S. S., & Al-Baridi, S. (2012). An overview of institutional repository developments in the Arabian Gulf Region. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 28(2), 79-89.
  3. Alonso, P., Garcia, G., Martin-Moncunill, D., Sanchez-Alonso, S., &Garcia, A. F. (2014). A usability study of taxonomy visualisation user interfaces in digital repositories. Online Information Review, 38(2), 284-304.
  4. Ardalan, R., &Feyzbaksh, O. (2011). What are universities doing here? Migrating traditional dissertations into ETDs in Iran.Library Hi Tech News, 28(9), 7-11.
  5. Arlitsch, K., & O'Brien, P. S. (2012).Invisible institutional repositories.Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 60-81.
  6. Borchard, L., Biondo, M., Kutay, S., Morck, D., & Weiss, A. P. (2015).Making journals accessible front & back: examining open journal systems at CSU Northridge.OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 31(1), 35-50.
  7. Chiang, C., Wang, H., & Lin, A. (2014).Implementing a multi-tiered framework for building NDLTD- Taiwan.Library Management, 35(4/5), 329-344.
  8. Coates, M. (2014).Electronic theses and dissertations.Library Hi Tech, 32(2), 285-299.
  9. Dhamdhere, S. N., De Smet, E., &Lihitkar, R. (2014). ABCD open source software for managing ETD repositories. Library Management, 35(4/5), 387-397.
  10. Emanuel, J. (2013). Usability testing in libraries: methods, limitations, and implications. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 29(4), 204-217.
  11. Feuer, G. (2014). ETD on a shoestring.Library Management, 35(4/5), 259-270.
  12. Fralinger, L., & Bull, J. (2013).Measuring the international usage of US institutional repositories.OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 29(3), 134-150.
  13. Gehanno, J. F., Rollin, L., &Darmoni, S. (2013). Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews? BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(7).doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-7
  14. Google Scholar.(n.d.). Retrieved July 25, 2015, from Google's website, https://scholar.google.co.za/intl/en/scholar/about.html
  15. Gupta, D. K., & Gupta, N. (2014). Analytical study of the ETD repositories and government initiatives for depositing ETDs in India.Library Management, 35(4/5), 308-319.
  16. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output.ProcNatlAcadSci, 102(46). doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102
  17. Howard, R. I., & Goldberg, T. (2011).Facilitating greater access to ETDs through CONTENTdm.OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 27(2), 113-123.
  18. Krug, S. (2014).Don't make me think - Revisited. San Francisco: New Riders.
  19. Lihitkar, R. S. (2014). Electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) in India: a comparative study. Library Hi Tech News, 31(2), 9-14.
  20. Li, Y., Theimer, S. H., &Preate, S. M. (2014). Campus partnerships advance both ETD implementation and IR development. Library Management, 35(4/5), 398-404.
  21. Lin, J. (2009). Is searching full text more effective than searching abstracts? BMC Bioinformatics, 10(46).doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-46
  22. Mattar, J., Chern, A., Liew, L., &Chawner, B. (2014). The influence of contextual factors on the adoption and development of Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETD) programmes in the Arab Gulf States. Library Management, 35(4/5), 355-363.
  23. Orduna-Malea, E., Martin-Martin, A., Ayllon, J. M., &Lopez-Cozar, E. D. (2014). The silent fading of an academic search engine: the case of Microsoft Academic Search. Online Information Review, 38(7), 936-953.
  24. Phillips, M. E., Gelaw, D., Brenda, A., & Ayala, R. (2014). Analysis of URL references in ETDs: a case study at the University of North Texas. Library Management, 35(4/5), 293-307.
  25. Ratanya, F. C. (2010). Electronic theses and dissertations (ETD) as unique open access materials: case of the
  26. Kenya Information Preservation Society (KIPS). Library Hi Tech News, 27(4/5), 15-20.
  27. Sawant, S. (2012). Indian institutional repositories: a study of user's perspective. Program, 46(1), 92-122.
  28. Sawant, S. (2011). Institutional repositories in India: a preliminary study. Library Hi Tech News, 28(10), 6-10.
  29. Shultz, M.(2007). Comparing test searches in PubMed and Google Scholar. J Med LibrAssoc, 95(4).doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.95.4.442
  30. Shuto, M., Manaka, T., Nakayama, S.,&Uchijima, H. (2014).Possibilities of networked electronic theses in Japan.Library Management, 35(4/5), 375-386.
  31. Solomou, G., &Koutsomitropoulos, D. (2015).Towards an evaluation of semantic searching in digital repositories: a DSpace case-study.Program: electronic library and information systems, 49(1), 63-90.
  32. Swain, D. K. (2010).Students' keenness on use of e-resources.The Electronic Library, 28(4), 580-591.
  33. Van Noorden, R. (2014, May 20). The decline and fall of Microsoft Academic Search.[Web log post]. Retrieved from http://blogs.nature.com/news/2014/05/the-decline-and-fall-of-microsoft-academic-search.html
  34. Veeranjaneyulu, K. (2014). KrishiKosh: an institutional repository of National Agricultural Research System in India. Library Management, 35(4/5), 345-354.
  35. Weideman, M. (2009).Website visibility: The theory and practice of improving rankings.Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishers.
  36. Weideman, M. (2013).Googling South African academic publications: search query generation methods. Published in Proceedings of the South African Institute for Computer Scientists and Information Technologists Conference, East London, South Africa, 90-95.doi: 10.1145/2513456.2513486
  37. Walters, W. H. (2007).Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field.Information Processing & Management, 43(4).doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2006.08.006
  38. Wang, X. L., Bulick, & N., Muyumba, V. (2014). Publishing student scholarship: exploring the ETD initiative at a medium-sized institution. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 30(4), 232-248.
  39. Zimerman, M. (2012).Digital natives, searching behavior and the library.New Library World, 113(3/4), 174-201.
  40. Zuze, H. &Weideman, M. (2011).A comparative analysis of search engine indexing time.Proceedings of The Thirteenth World Wide Web conference (ZAW3-11), Johannesburg, South Africa. Retrieved from http://www.web-visibility.co.za/website-visibility-digital-library-seo.php
Full text of Conference Proceedings No 0168: ETD Visibility: A study on the exposure of Indian ETDs to the Google Scholar crawler.

Digital Library with full-text of academic publications on website visibility, usability, search engines, information retrieval

Back to Home page