Google Might Help You, but It Might Not
Google can be a researcher’s best friend and worst nightmare at the same time. We do not know the extent of what is in Google. This is frustrating for librarians, who like to know the contents of the databases they are searching—is a certain issue of a certain volume of a certain journal included in the database or not? Most research databases easily let us know the answer, but Google does not. There are no catalogs of journal titles that describe coverage. You run a search from the search bar and hope for the best. If you find what you are looking for, that’s great. If you do not, then you really do not know whether it is some kind of search error or whether the document is just not there. But the worst issue is that if you are doing keyword searching, you really do not know if you are missing important documents because you do not know if they are included in the collection of documents that Google is searching.
That is not to say that you should not use Google, but you should be aware of how it works. First of all, if you use Google, use Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com), not regular Google. Google Scholar includes scholarly journal articles (though from which journals and what dates we do not know—Google probably doesn’t even know). In May 2014, Madian Khabsa and C. Lee Giles estimated that Google Scholar accesses nearly 100 million English-language scholarly documents, approximately 87 percent of those on the web.1 It also has a feature that is much like Shepardizing, only for the scholarly articles in its own database. You can easily see what other articles cited to the main article with the click of a mouse.
There’s an Index for That: Forensic Science Abstracts
Forensic Science Abstracts is a journal that provides abstracts and citations for the latest forensic science articles. It pulls from 4,000 biomedical journals and focuses on science related to criminal investigation and coroners.2 Forensic Science Abstracts is included in the larger research system, Embase, which contains over 31 million records for literature in the biomedical field.3 While the digital version of Forensic Science Abstracts must be purchased with Embase, the print version is available on its own. One or both of these may be available at your library.
Web of Science Is a Huge Science Literature Database
Web of Science is a research system for science literature that contains 100 million records in dozens of disciplines.4 It provides abstracts dating back over 100 years.5 Dr. Eugene Garfield, a pioneer in indexing scientific literature, founded the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in 1960 and produced the first Science Citation Index in 1964.6 He eventually published the ISI Web of Science and the ISI Web of Knowledge, which incorporated other academic disciplines as well. Thomson Corporation acquired ISI in 1992. The Web of Science, which now includes former Web of Knowledge references, is now owned by Clarivate Analytics (formerly Thomson Reuters Intellectual Property and Science). Check to see if your library has a subscription to Web of Science, as it is available at many university libraries.
Publisher Indexes Are Free to Search
While law reviews and journals are primarily published by law schools, academic science journals are more often published by private publishers. For example, Forensic Science International is published by Elsevier and available on Elsevier’s website.7 The journal can be searched for free, and abstracts are always free to read. To read the full article, you have a couple of choices: you can purchase it instantly or see if you can get it from your online legal research, library, or interlibrary loan.
The Library Is the New Google
The library catalog is not just for finding what is in the library building anymore. Many libraries have adopted library catalog discovery systems that let you research through millions of books, articles, reports, and other documents. These research systems will search for articles across database subscriptions, even those that the library does not subscribe to. For example, if you input a search for something like “luminol,” you retrieve thousands of results. You can then use the facets on the side of the page to narrow the results to type of document, year, language, database provider, and much more. It’s like doing a Google search, but eliminating junk from the results, leaving you with only scholarly or professional resources.
You can use any library discovery system to do research and collect citations. But if you are connected with a library and can sign into the discovery system, you will be able to access the full text of many articles and ebooks for free. Either way, you can always use the citations to order an interlibrary loan.
Admissibility of Expert Witness Testimony: Daubert Tracker
Although it is really a legal research resource rather than a science research resource, Daubert Tracker is essential for any lawyer who has a scientific evidence issue. Daubert Tracker helps research the admissibility of expert witness testimony. It reports cases where an expert was found to be unqualified, not credible, or unbelievable; where the expert’s methods were questioned; or where the testimony was found to be irrelevant or outside the scope of the expertise of the expert.8 The database contains not only case opinions, but also briefs, motions, docket sheets, and transcripts.9
National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law
The National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law (NCSTL) has helpful information for both lawyers and scientists. Sponsored by a grant from the National Institute of Justice, NCSTL offers forensic science educational programs for lawyers and scientists, and a database that will lead researchers to information on a wide variety of forensic topics, such as DNA, fingerprints, and trace evidence. Lawyers can earn CLE credit for attending NCSTL’s seminars and webinars or working through its online training program in forensic science.
One part of the NCSTL website that will be of particular interest to the attorney researcher is the recorded webinar “Digging Up Dirt on Experts”10 by NCSTL Director and Stetson Law Professor Carol Henderson. This webinar teaches viewers how to locate and research expert witnesses who might be used at trial. A related web resources guide is also available.
Endnotes
1. Madian Khabsa & C. Lee Giles, The Number of Scholarly Documents on the Public Web, 9 PLoS ONE, no. 5, May 2014, http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0093949.
2. Forensic Science Abstracts (Section 49 EMBASE), Elsevier, https://www.elsevier.com/journals/forensic-science-abstracts-section-49-embase/0303-8459 (last visited July 6, 2017).
3. Embase, Elsevier, https://www.elsevier.com/promo/rd-solutions/embase (last visited July 6, 2017).
4. Web of Science, Clarivate Analytics, http://clarivate.com/?product=web-of-science (last visited July 6, 2017).
5. Id.
6. In Memoriam: Dr. Eugene Garfield, Clarivate Analytics, http://clarivate.com/dr-garfield (last visited July 6, 2017).
7. Forensic Science International, Elsevier, https://www.journals.elsevier.com/Forensic-Science-International (last visited July 6, 2017).
8. Daubert Tracker, http://www.dauberttracker.com (last visited July 6, 2017).
9. Database, Daubert Tracker, http://www.dauberttracker.com/product/database.cfm (last visited July 6, 2017).
10. Digging Up Dirt on Experts, NCSTL.org, http://www.ncstl.org/education/Digging%20Up%20Dirt%20on%20Expert%20 Witnesses (last visited July 6, 2017).