TY - JOUR
T1 - A logical set theory approach to journal subject classification analysis
T2 - intra-system irregularities and inter-system discrepancies in Web of Science and Scopus
AU - Aviv-Reuven, Shir
AU - Rosenfeld, Ariel
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
PY - 2023/1
Y1 - 2023/1
N2 - Journal classification into subject categories is an important aspect in scholarly research evaluation as well as in bibliometric analysis. However, this classification is not standardized, resulting in several different journal subject classification systems. In this study, we adopt a logical set theory-based definition of irregularities within a given classification system and discrepancies between systems and investigate their prevalence in the two most widely used indexing services of Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. In both systems, we identify unusually sized categories, high overlap and incohesiveness between categories. In addition, across the two systems, journals are systematically classified to a different number of categories and most categories in either system are not adequately represented in the other system. Our findings suggest that these irregularities and discrepancies are, in fact, non-anecdotal and thus cannot be easily disregarded. Consequently, potentially misguided and/or inconsistent outcomes may be encountered when relying on these subject classification systems.
AB - Journal classification into subject categories is an important aspect in scholarly research evaluation as well as in bibliometric analysis. However, this classification is not standardized, resulting in several different journal subject classification systems. In this study, we adopt a logical set theory-based definition of irregularities within a given classification system and discrepancies between systems and investigate their prevalence in the two most widely used indexing services of Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. In both systems, we identify unusually sized categories, high overlap and incohesiveness between categories. In addition, across the two systems, journals are systematically classified to a different number of categories and most categories in either system are not adequately represented in the other system. Our findings suggest that these irregularities and discrepancies are, in fact, non-anecdotal and thus cannot be easily disregarded. Consequently, potentially misguided and/or inconsistent outcomes may be encountered when relying on these subject classification systems.
KW - Journal subject classification
KW - Logical set theory
KW - Scientometrics
KW - Scopus
KW - Web of Science
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85142364612&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11192-022-04576-3
DO - 10.1007/s11192-022-04576-3
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85142364612
SN - 0138-9130
VL - 128
SP - 157
EP - 175
JO - Scientometrics
JF - Scientometrics
IS - 1
ER -