Google Scholar is not broken (yet), but there are alternatives
For many Google Scholar has become a critical piece of research infrastructure. Yet, revelations in the manipulability of its metrics and its inclusion of AI generated papers have led some to ask is it still functional? Kirsten Elliott argues rather than being broken, these issues reflect the limitations of any academic search tool, but for those done with the platform there are alternatives.
For those who haven’t ventured into the ‘other place’, this post builds on some threads posted on BlueSky, in response to discussions on that platform about Google Scholar’s “brokenness.”
The question of whether Google Scholar is broken has the obvious answer of “It depends”: on what it’s being used for, how it’s being used, and what alternatives are available.
Google Scholar has advantages over traditional academic databases like Scopus and Web of Science: it’s free to use, requires no log in for searching, and has more comprehensive coverage, especially of non-journal sources such as books and theses. These benefits are particularly important for unaffiliated scholars without institutional access to resources, and those in the humanities.
