Abstract

Legal academia is likely stuck with law faculty scholarly impact rankings—that is, using citation counts to judge a law faculty’s reputation and influence. But why can’t we produce better, more useful studies? Current rankings rely on outdated methods. Moreover, these rankings—touted by their creators as objective—suffer from long-standing flaws. They are also grounded in limited understandings of legal citations as sources of information. This paper calls on law librarians to advance legal citation research by adopting methodologies from other information sciences and developing legal citation taxonomies and theories.

ISSN

2831-8048

Disciplines

Law | Legal Education

Download

Share

COinS