This study investigates how different approaches to disciplinary classification represent the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in the Flemish VABB-SHW database. We compare organizational classification (based on author affiliation), channel-based cognitive classification (based on publication venues), and text-based publication-level classification (using channel titles, publication titles, and abstracts, depending on availability). The analysis shows that text-based classification generally aligns more closely with channel-based categories, confirming that the channel choice provides relevant information about publication content. At the same time, it is closer to organizational classification than channel-based categories are, suggesting that textual features capture author affiliations more directly than publishing channels do. Comparison across the three systems highlights cases of convergence and divergence, offering insights into how disciplines such as "Sociology" and "History" extend across fields, while "Law" remains more contained. Publication-level classification also clarifies the disciplinary profiles of multidisciplinary journals in the database, which in VABB-SHW show distinctive profiles with stronger emphases on SSH and health sciences. At the journal level, fewer than half of outlets with more than 50 publications have their channel-level classification fully or partially supported by more than 90% of publications. These results demonstrate the added value of text-based methods for validating classifications and for analysing disciplinary dynamics.

翻译：本研究探讨了不同学科分类方法如何表征佛兰德VABB-SHW数据库中的社会科学与人文科学（SSH）。我们比较了组织分类（基于作者所属机构）、基于渠道的认知分类（基于发表载体）以及基于文本的出版物层级分类（根据可用性使用渠道名称、出版物标题和摘要）。分析表明，基于文本的分类通常与基于渠道的类别更为一致，证实了渠道选择能够提供关于出版物内容的相关信息。同时，它比基于渠道的类别更接近组织分类，表明文本特征比发表渠道更直接地反映了作者所属机构。三种系统的比较揭示了趋同与分化的案例，为理解“社会学”和“历史学”等学科如何跨越领域延伸提供了见解，而“法学”则保持相对独立。出版物层级分类还阐明了数据库中多学科期刊的学科特征，这些期刊在VABB-SHW中显示出独特的分布特征，更侧重于SSH和健康科学。在期刊层面，发表量超过50篇的出版物中，仅有不到一半的期刊其渠道层级分类得到超过90%出版物的完全或部分支持。这些结果证明了基于文本的方法在验证分类和分析学科动态方面的附加价值。