Johan Bollen, Marko A. Rodriguez, and Herbert Van de Sompel "Journal Status" arXiv:cs.GL/0601030 v1 9 Jan 2006

[Stephen J Bensman]

I really do not understand what you mean by "methodological legitimation"
and why these categories need to be legitimized.  I look at the titles in
the categories, and the words of the titles are enough to legitimize them.
I only suspect problems when I am plagued by outliers and interaction
effects.

When I first started to analyze "chemistry" journals, I once told a
colleague that the entire thing would be simple, if I could only figure out
what a "chemistry" journal was, and he laughed at me.  Now he no longer
laughs at me when I use terms such as "chemistryness" to indicate that the
journals are only an outward manifestation in the material world of the
Platonic Idea of "chemistry."

Every time I drive my car or use a computer I use something that I don't
understand.  I still think that my computer consists of little mice running
on treadmills.  I use a lot of statistics, whose mathematical bases are
entirely beyond me.  It is just enough for me that these things work.  The
economic term, I think, is "specialization."

SB




Loet Leydesdorff <loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET>@listserv.utk.edu> on 03/08/2006
12:47:01 AM

Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
       <SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu>

Sent by:    ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
       <SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu>


To:    SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu
cc:     (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU)

Subject:    Re: [SIGMETRICS] Johan Bollen, Marko A. Rodriguez, and Herbert
       Van de Sompel "Journal Status" arXiv:cs.GL/0601030 v1 9 Jan 2006


> PS  I use ISI subject categories and have found them very
> good.  But then I am used to using bad classification systems
> like LC and the DDC.

I am happy for you! However, this was not my question. I was just wondering
about the methodological legitimation of these categories. Can one use
something which one does not understand -- and nobody seems to understand
them -- as a basis for research and evaluation decisions? One knows that
outcomes of, for example, bibliometric assessments are heavily dependent on
this type of delineations.

Perhaps, I am the more old-fashioned one of the two of us. :-)

Best,  Loet