Databases to search
Top databases of choice for Computer Science:
-
ACM Digital Library
The most comprehensive collection of full-text articles and bibliographic records in existence today covering the fields of computing and information technology. The full-text database includes the complete collection of Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and affiliated organizations publications, including journals, conference proceedings, magazines, newsletters, and multimedia titles. -
IEEE Xplore Digital Library
Approximately a third of the world's current electrical engineering, electronics and computer science literature, featuring journals & conference proceedings from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET). Current, archived, and redlined IEEE standards.
Also recommended by your textbook:
-
arXiv.orgPhysics, mathematics, non-linear science, computer science, & quantitative biology, and statistics. This is an openly accessible, moderated repository for scholarly articles in specific scientific disciplines.
-
SpringerLinkProviding researchers with access to millions of scientific documents from journals, books, series, protocols and reference works.
-
Wiley Online LibraryWiley is the international scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly publishing business of John Wiley & Sons, with strengths in every major academic and professional field and partnerships with many of the world's leading societies.
Google Scholar
If you would prefer to use Google Scholar, be sure to customize your Google account so you can access materials at the library.
- Choose Settings from the Top-Left Menu.
- Click "Library Links", and search for "Texas State University"
- Check the boxes next to Texas State University. Now your results will include links to articles in many of our library databases.
Keep in mind that Google Scholar does not search the same set of materials that are available in the library.
- There are (a GREAT many) journals in Google Scholar that are not academic or authoritative. Interrogate their credibility more vigorously.
- There are journals at the library that are not in Google Scholar. Not finding much? Go check the library itself.
-
Cabells AnalyticsSearch for a journal in Cabells to determine whether it may be a known fraudulent journal. The "Journalytics" area lists known reputable journals. "Predatory Reports" area gathers questionable journals.
Indicators of Authority
To find the "Top Papers" on your topic, start with what does "Top" mean? What are the indicators of authority on your topic? It is a constructed and contextual phenomenon, but there are some places you can start:
- What is the citation count of this paper?
- If others have found it worthy of building upon or repeating, perhaps it's a top paper.
- Check the citations out, though. Perhaps people are citing it to refute it! Perhaps the author is engaging in "self-citation", and really no one else other than the author is building upon the work.
- Older works can have more citations than newer works. So a 2015 article with 90 citations might sound more impressive than a 2017 article with 10 citations, but the fact that in less than a year 10 people have already cited a work *is* really impressive!
- Is this a well-recognized publication or conference?
- What *type* of publication is this, and how does it affect the credibility?
- Example: The most recent result in a search might be an ACM Newsletter that simply gives a preview of some research that is not complete. The newsletter is simply "news", not peer-reviewed research. It's important that you know what's going on in the world, but this is not the basis for an academic research paper.
- What *type* of publication is this, and how does it affect the credibility?
- Who is the author?
- Where do they work and what do they teach?
- Are they not a researcher, but in fact a business person trying to sell a product? Interrogate motive as well as authority.
- Is this a pinnacle of this line of research?
- Follow the references backward, then follow the citations forward.
- Was the next work after this one far more highly cited? Did it have research that was more mature and developed?