For researchers aiming to achieve the highest standards in their work, access to the most current and high-quality interdisciplinary content is essential. Scopus, renowned for its rigorous selection policy and a globally recognized Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB), guarantees that the material available meets the highest academic benchmarks.
Although much of the following information is primarily targeted at publishers wishing to include their content in Scopus, we encourage researchers to explore these insights. They reflect the meticulous scrutiny and authority that define Scopus’s commitment to quality.
Continuous Evaluation and Expansion of Scopus
As the largest indexer of global research content, Scopus includes titles from over 7,000 publishers worldwide, enhancing the visibility of scholarly work to millions of users. This visibility translates into citations in academic papers, grant applications, and patent submissions. To cater to the diverse needs of the research community, the CSAB is dedicated to continuously reviewing and expanding Scopus’s content listings, ensuring comprehensive representation of high-quality publications.
Scopus actively assists publishers in various ways:
- Enhancing publication visibility
- Connecting with a global audience of researchers
- Tracking publication performance and monitoring competition
Transparent Title Evaluation Process
Scopus prides itself on its transparent selection process and independent review board. The international experts within the CSAB regularly assess new titles through both quantitative and qualitative metrics. Only serial titles—encompassing journals, book series, or conference proceedings—are eligible for consideration. Publishers, editors, and individual researchers can propose titles, but these suggestions must have backing from the respective publisher or editor. Before proposing a title, the following steps should be taken:
- Verify existing titles using the current Scopus title lists.
- Review the CSAB’s general introduction to understand its work.
- Examine the selection criteria.
- Complete the Scopus Title Suggestion Form.
- Read the FAQs related to the content selection process.
The individual proposing a title, along with the publisher (if different), will be informed about the review outcome and the rationale behind the decision. Scopus is proactively adding titles to its evaluation pipeline to enrich the database, and evaluations will only commence after obtaining the publisher’s consent. Users can also monitor the evaluation process using a unique Tracking ID.
Re-evaluation Policy for Title Quality
Maintaining high content quality is paramount for Scopus. Titles must not only undergo stringent evaluation and selection processes prior to acceptance but also demonstrate the ability to uphold quality standards annually. To monitor journal quality, Scopus implements an ongoing Re-evaluation program to identify underperforming journals based on four criteria:
- Metrics and Benchmarks: Every year, Scopus analyzes the performance of journals against specific metrics. If a journal fails to meet all three benchmarks for two consecutive years, it is flagged for re-evaluation.
- Publication Concerns: Journals may also be flagged based on legitimate concerns about their publication standards, which can be reported by the research community or identified by Scopus.
- Outlier Performance: Using a data analytics algorithm called RADAR, Scopus detects outlier performance in journals, noting unusual changes in publication patterns, author geographical diversity, and self-citation rates.
- Continuous Curation: Since the establishment of the CSAB, Scopus has systematically collected review data, ensuring ongoing content curation. Any journal identified for underperformance or other issues will be re-evaluated based on the same criteria used for new title evaluations.
Following the re-evaluation process, the CSAB will decide whether to continue or discontinue a journal’s coverage in Scopus. Discontinued titles may only be reconsidered for evaluation five years after their removal.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements
Publication malpractice is a critical issue affecting the integrity of scholarly literature. Scopus mandates that all indexed journals maintain clear, publicly accessible publication ethics and malpractice statements. Each publisher listed in the database is held accountable for compliance with these standards. While Scopus does not enforce specific wording for these statements, many major publishers already publish comprehensive compliance guidelines. Organizations like the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) offer frameworks that publishers can adopt.
Journal Scope and Selection Criteria
To be eligible for review, journal titles must adhere to specific criteria:
- Peer-reviewed content with a publicly available peer review process
- Regular publication schedule with an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)
- Content relevant to an international audience with English abstracts and titles
- Publicly accessible publication ethics and malpractice statements
The CSAB members, equipped with deep subject matter expertise, actively seek out literature that meets the evolving standards and needs of the research community. Eligible journals will be evaluated based on criteria across five categories:
- Journal Policy: Editorial policy, peer review type, and geographical diversity of editors and authors.
- Content: Academic contribution, clarity of abstracts, and overall quality.
- Journal Standing: Citation metrics and editor reputation.
- Publishing Regularity: Consistency in publication schedules.
- Online Availability: Access to full journal content online and a quality journal homepage.
In summary, Scopus is committed to ensuring that only the highest quality content is available to researchers, making it an essential resource for academic excellence.