10.3 CSCD

Supported from CiteSpace 4.1.R1 (6/12/2016).

Warning: The quality of the cited references is significantly lower than that of the Web of Science core collection.

CSCD - 中国科学引文数据库 - indexes articles published in Chinese journals.

CSCD's format is very close to the standard Web of Science format, but it also has some discrepancies, which are not always justifiable.

CSCD has the following fields that are specifically related to articles in Chinese. If a field's name tag starts with Z, you can expect its content is either text in Chinese or numeric values.

Z1: The article's title in Chinese

Z2: The authors' names in Chinese

Z3: The counterpart of the SO field except this is in Chinese

Z4: The abstract in Chinese

Z5: Keywords in Chinese

Z6: The counterpart of the C1 field in the standard WoS format

Z7: The counterpart of the EM field

Z8: The times cited in CSCD

Z9: The total times cited across the WoS, CSCD, and BCI

CSCD shares several common fields with the standard WoS format. However, the order of appearances is different, which seems to be an odd decision because no obvious gains to do so.

The overall quality of the CR field is below the average quality of the WoS.

If a CSCD article is published in a Chinese journal in English, both the authors' names and the journal title will appear in both English and Chinese, e.g.

[史春云 Shi Chunyun], 2005, [地理与地理信息科学, Geography and Geo-information

Science], V21, P85

A major problem with the CSCD's format is that a single CR entry can break up over multiple lines for no apparent reason. For example, the following three lines make up a single entry, but it is badly formed due to the unpredictable ways to break-up lines:

Bloom D E, 2011, The global economic burden of non-communicable

diseases: a report by the world economic forum and the Harvard School of

public health

As of CiteSpace 4.1.R1 (6/12/2016), the success rate for the parser is 79.72%, leaving the remaining 20.29% unresolved references.

In comparison, the demo projects in CiteSpace have much higher resolution rates (all are above 90%, i.e. at least 10% higher):

The Demo 1: Terrorism in the Web of Science: 92.93% vs. 7.07%

The Demo 2: Scientometrics in the Web of Science has 97.59% vs. 2.41%.

The Demo 4: CSSCI from CSSCI has 99.99% vs. 0.01%.

A document co-citation network.

A network of keywords (Z5).