First of all, any measure of anything is subjective and any norm is arbitrary by definition, what implies that there is not an objective measure of good science but only social conventions. However, the measure selected for whatever reasons (economical, politics…) in the case of (good) science must be analyzed to study its collateral effects (bad science like product) or costs and in the case of being ridiculous or too much distorted it should be rejected. It is not different to the euribor or IRPH for mortgage. The cost of the house credit can be double depending on the index selected by your bank. What are in the case of number of citations the collateral effects for science and research? Has someone study it? But before, we can think about the axiom or underlying logic of number of citations like criterion: a) the belief that researchers must compete between them and b) to improve science products (good products). In the case a) someone, philosophers of science and scientifics must analyze if this non natural selection is a good idea or cooperation can be a better system for science. It depends on our metaphor of science like microworld, is it like an sport, like religion, like a company, like a service to human beings, like culture, intrinsic motivation for learning or altruism to improve life…? In the case b) the products of science are associated to the metaphor of science. What should be science products? papers or knowledge. Because they are not the same things. Number of peer review papers is a bad product of science. It says nothing about quality. Just thing in any other product like tomato or cars, number of X is not the best goal. We know that the definition of intelligence like what is measured by intelligence tests is a case of circularity. The definition of science like number of citations or papers (that correlated between them) is another case of circularity. Nothing is guaranteed here or a bad thing: bad products. The displacement of knowledge like the product for an abstract index without real meaning: number of citations or papers. The meaning on number of citations could be that “people (scientifics) is talking about it”. But is it a good criterion or is it only a social interest, rumour, conversation. How on earth can be rumour or conversation a good science definition? In any case what are the collateral effects of these imposed definition of good science? It operates against novelty, creativity or flexible cognition. For example, in case of Spain, the government office for Development and Innovation of Science, is (in my opinion) a disaster. There is not transparency at all in the criterions or in the feedback but the number of citations affects the resolution. No funds, no science. Then you need a lot of citations to pass. We change internal motivation of scientifics (learning) for external one (scores). For that you can not be innovative or you can not change your topic, because it implies to re-start (more difficulty to publish and less citations from the persons dominant in the field because you are not following them). You must belong to a big team not to a small one, you can not play slow science but fast one, you must focus in a very small piece of reality (inhibition of return, the hypocampus…) without perspective of the system (the human being, the universe). You loose perspective, you can not look back (to the Greeks philosophy ) or ahead (is is the good way?), outside(to other disciplines) or inside (how I feel with my research, what is my own perspective?). The consequence is ignorant scientifics or secondary analphabets, the reward of mediocrity. Criticism is out of the system (you can not stop your prosecution of papers and citations) or you are out, and you do jumps bigger than the mind-body gap to defend “the big importance” of your small lab research with respect to reality or the world (science-fiction). the test or evidence is the number of citations. But in fact, you just produce papers not knowledge, they are about science fiction not real science. What is the real meaning of the Academic ranking of World Universities?