Reasons for re-evaluating the journal by Scopus


These are the three metrics and benchmarks used to identify underperforming journals for re-evaluation on Scopus.

Metric

Benchmarks and Explanation

Self-citation rate

The journal has a substantially higher self-citation rate when compared to peer journals in its subject field.

Total citation rate

The journal received a substantially lower number of citations when compared to peer journals in its subject field.

CiteScore

The journal has a substantially lower CiteScore when compared to peer journals in its subject field.


There are four ways a journal can be flagged for re-evaluation in Scopus:

  1. The journal is underperforming as it does not meet any of the three metrics and benchmarks (above) that have been developed and agreed by the CSAB in partnership with the Scopus team.
  2. Concerns about the publication standards of the journal or publisher have been raised by formal complaints.
  3. The journal shows outlier behavior based on its publishing performance in Scopus.
  4. Collection and analyses of previous CSAB title evaluation feedback can result in re-checking the journal for Scopus coverage.

We remind you that the Scopus database in June 2021 published a new list of journals that are no longer indexed by the platform. You can read more about this at the link.

Source: https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/how-scopus-works/content/content-policy-and-selection/_nocache#reevaluation

s2.png

Shatylova dacha str., 4, of. 702, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61165

+38 (057) 750-89-90
+38 (097) 020-27-30
+38 (050) 303-38-01

Image
Image
Image
Image