Well, Google Scholar does have some positives...
But overall...
Biological Abstracts (via Web of Science) |
Google Scholar |
Has multiple, sophisticated categorizations of content (specific to biology) which allows for focused searching and brings more relevant results. |
Does not have much categorization of content so searching is less powerful: it’s harder to focus. |
Allows users to sort results according to date, relevance, publication, first author, and other elements. |
Only allows date and relevance sorting of results list. |
Identifies results by type of material (academic journal, magazine, newspaper, etc.). |
Does not clearly specify what type of material (academic journal, magazine, newspaper, etc.) is in the results list. |
Gives you seamless access to full text of an electronic article if WIU Libraries subscribe to that journal/database. Refers to print access we have at WIU if not available electronically. |
Contains links to full text of some free electronic articles [as well as WIU-available content if using optimized link]. Some links point to fee-based content, however. |
Contains entries for pre-published articles, but updates information to the final, published version of an article when it becomes available. |
Contains links to many pre-published manuscripts, which may or may not be problematic. |
Allows users to create their own WoS account to save searches and search results (using sophisticated db options). |
If you are logged in to a Google account, you will be able to save articles and create alerts. But the search structure and results remain less focused. |
Adapted from: https://howardcc.libguides.com/c.php?g=52041&p=428654