Normalization of citation scores using reference sets based on W eb of S cience subject categories ( WC s) has become an established (“best”) practice in evaluative bibliometrics. For example, the T imes H igher E ducation W orld U niversity R ankings are, among other things, based on this operationalization. However, WC s were developed decades ago for the purpose of information retrieval and evolved incrementally with the database; the classification is machine‐based and partially manually corrected. Using the WC “information science & library science” and the WC s attributed to journals in the field of “science and technology studies,” we show that WC s do not provide sufficient analytical clarity to carry bibliometric normalization in evaluation practices because of “indexer effects.” Can the compliance with “best practices” be replaced with an ambition to develop “best possible practices”? New research questions can then be envisaged.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 129 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.