IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v116y2018i3d10.1007_s11192-018-2808-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of discontinued journals by Scopus

Author

Listed:
  • Erwin Krauskopf

    (Universidad Andres Bello
    Fundacion Ciencia y Vida)

Abstract

Researchers continually strive to communicate their findings to peers, hoping to receive recognition for their contribution in a not-so-distant future. The prevailing idea of “publish or perish” becomes imperative when researchers are applying for competitive grants or academic promotions. Choosing a suitable journal has become an important issue as thousands of journals are available. One of the aspects considered by researchers is the journal’s indexation status. Scopus continuously evaluates journals submitted by publishers for indexation, and later, to verify if quality is maintained. During this re-evaluation process, some publication concerns may be raised at journal or publisher level. Consequently, Scopus periodically issues a list of discontinued journals. However, not all journals update their websites in order to inform readers that they have been discontinued. This study shows that 56 journals that were discontinued in 2016 currently affirm on their websites that they are indexed by Scopus. In addition, another 20 journals discontinued in 2016, which do not specifically state that they are indexed by Scopus, include a widget from SCImago that may generate confusion about their current indexing situation. For some journals it seems that the emphasis is placed more on the publishing end of the business than the dissemination of research findings. This study shows that regular updates are among the responsibilities that editorial teams must maintain to ensure the quality and accuracy of the information posted on journal websites.

Suggested Citation

  • Erwin Krauskopf, 2018. "An analysis of discontinued journals by Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1805-1815, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:116:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2808-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2808-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-2808-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-018-2808-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alison Abbott & David Cyranoski & Nicola Jones & Brendan Maher & Quirin Schiermeier & Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Metrics: Do metrics matter?," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7300), pages 860-862, June.
    2. Tove Faber Frandsen, 2017. "Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1513-1528, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    2. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    3. Erwin Krauskopf, 2020. "Sources without a CiteScore value: more clarity is required," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1801-1812, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaur, Jasleen & Radicchi, Filippo & Menczer, Filippo, 2013. "Universality of scholarly impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 924-932.
    2. Bruce B. Svare, 2020. "A Cautionary Tale for Psychology and Higher Education in Asia: Following Western Practices of Incentivising Scholarship May Have Negative Outcomes," Psychology and Developing Societies, , vol. 32(1), pages 94-121, March.
    3. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    4. Du Jian & Tang Xiaoli, 2013. "Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 277-295, July.
    5. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    6. Nasir Ahmad Aziz & Maarten Pieter Rozing, 2013. "Profit (p)-Index: The Degree to Which Authors Profit from Co-Authors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-8, April.
    7. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & André Garenne & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2020. "Does newspapers coverage influence the citations count of scientific publications? An analysis of biomedical studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 413-427, April.
    8. Steffen Lemke & Athanasios Mazarakis & Isabella Peters, 2021. "Conjoint analysis of researchers' hidden preferences for bibliometrics, altmetrics, and usage metrics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(6), pages 777-792, June.
    9. Joshua Eykens & Raf Guns & A I M Jakaria Rahman & Tim C E Engels, 2019. "Identifying publications in questionable journals in the context of performance-based research funding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
    10. Ole Ellegaard, 2018. "The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 181-202, July.
    11. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Daniel J. Dunleavy & Mina Moradzadeh & Joshua Eykens, 2021. "A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8589-8616, October.
    12. Dimity Stephen, 2023. "Medical articles in questionable journals are less impactful than those in non-questionable journals but still extensively cited," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4509-4522, August.
    13. Mark D Lindner & Richard K Nakamura, 2015. "Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-12, June.
    14. Jinseok Kim, 2018. "Evaluating author name disambiguation for digital libraries: a case of DBLP," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1867-1886, September.
    15. Rehs, Andreas, 2021. "A supervised machine learning approach to author disambiguation in the Web of Science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    16. Libor Ansorge, 2023. "The right to reject an unwanted citations: do we need it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4147-4150, July.
    17. Denis Kosyakov & Andrey Guskov, 2022. "Reasons and consequences of changes in Russian research assessment policies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4609-4630, August.
    18. Qiang Wu & Peng Zhang, 2017. "Some indices violating the basic domination relation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 495-500, October.
    19. Pierre Boutros & Ali Fakih & Sara Kassab & Zeina Lizzaik, 2022. "Does the Number of Publications Matter for Academic Promotion in Higher Education? Evidence from Lebanon," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2017. "Neophilia ranking of scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 43-64, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Scopus; SCImago; Indexing; Journal;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:116:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2808-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.