HOME JOURNALS AND PUBLICATIONS UPCOMING CONFERENCE NEWS LETTER FAQ JOIN IFERP CONTACT US

SUBSCRIBE TO
NEWSLETTER
 Subscribe to our newsletter
to get latest conference &
journal publications *

Enter Your Email Address

Submit

VIRTUAL CONFERENCE

Scopus vs Web of science journal;

Which one is better
APRIL 28, 2022  SCOPUS INDEXED JOURNALS 2022

SCOPUS INDEXED JOURNAL

Informing Science: The International Journal

Nowadays, the importance of bibliographic databases (DB) has increased enormously.
of an Emerging Transdiscipline
Civil Engineering and Architecture Journal
They happen to be the primary providers of publication metadata, and bibliometric
indicators universally used both for research evaluation practices and for carrying out Universal Journal of Accounting and Finance
daily tasks. Since the reliability of these tasks depends primarily on the data source, all Journal of Physics
database users should be able to select the best one for them. WoS or Web of Science
and Scopus are the two main bibliographic databases. Complete assessment of
database coverage is virtually impossible without in-depth bibliometric analyzes or WEB OF SCIENCE JOURNAL
literature reviews, but most database users lack bibliometric competence and/or are
unwilling to invest additional time for such assessments. Apart from this –  Eurasian Chemical Communications
Brazilian Journal Of Operations & Production
the convenience of the database interface, performance,  Management
provided impact indicators, and 
International Transaction Journal Of
additional tools can also influence users’ choices. Engineering Management & Applied Sciences
& Technologies
This blog intends to offer all potential users a complete description of the two main
bibliographic databases. This overview should help researchers select the most
appropriate database for them. Partaking in a 2022 international conference should
PUBLONS AND MENDELEY
also help acquaint you with the individual merits of Scopus and WoS journals even
JOURNALS
better. 

International Journal of Engineering and

Biological Databases – An Overview
Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
International Journal of Engineering and
The original purpose of scientific publishing was to enable the global sharing of
Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
scientific results, ideas, and discussions within the academic society for more
effective scientific achievements. 
Nevertheless, over the years, the role of scientific publications has evolved
GOOGLE SCHOLAR JOURNAL
enormously. 
Today, many of the most important decisions regarding – 
International Journal of Engineering
industrial and economic growth priorities, 
Research in Computer Science and
allocation of funding resources, 
Engineering (IJERCSE)
education policies, 
International Journal of Engineering
creation of opportunities for collaboration, 
Research in Electronics and Communication
tenure,
Engineering(IJERECE)
the hiring of personnel academic, etc., 
are based on the evaluation of scientific production and the quality of research,
approximated as an influence of a publication have become the most crucial criterion.
Join IFERP Premium
Since bibliographic databases (DBs) are the primary sources of publication metadata
Membership & Get
and citation metrics, their importance has also risen sharply. 
Scopus and Web of Science are usually the main bibliographic databases More Benefits
conventionally accepted as the most comprehensive data sources for various
purposes. 
JOIN NOW
WoS was the first wide-ranging international bibliographic database. 
Therefore, over time, it has become the most influential source of bibliographic data
traditionally used for journal selection, research assessment, bibliometric analyses,
and other tasks. 
WoS was the sole source of bibliographic data for over forty years until 2004, when
Scopus was launched by Elsevier. 
Over the years, Scopus has earned its reputation as a comprehensive bibliographic IFERP
data source, and it has proven to be reliable and, in some ways, even better than Ikuti Halaman 5,7 rb pengikut

WoS. 
However, because WoS and Scopus are commercial and subscription-based products, IFERP
7 jam yang lalu
the worldwide recognition and use of these databases has resulted in their high
price, making it rarely affordable for an institution to subscribe to both.  ICMRP Conference was a success,
As a result, institutions are often forced to choose between these data sources. therefore there is only one thing left to say,
Thank you to everyone who participated and
Usually, the choice of DB subscription institution is primarily determined by the made it possible.
parameters that are enforced in national and institutional research assessment IFERP would like to express its gratitude to
policies.  associate partner Rajabhat Maha Sarakham
Apart from this, bibliographic databases are also the main data providers for the University for taking the initiative to
contribute their support to making this
major global university ranking organizations.  conference a huge success.
Use the following link to view the movie and

Tweets from @iferpconnectin1

 IFERP @iferpconnectin1 · Nov 16
How to choose best upcoming Scop
below

lnkd.in/g6RsYHBa

#research #iferp #journal #publicatio

#scopuspublication #iferpblog #blog

RECENT POSTS

Scopus indexed journals 2023 with

publications
Choose List of academic journals by
Fast Scopus Publication – IFERP
Impact factor
Despite the validity of these rankings is often questioned, their results still greatly List of International Conference on
influence the overall prestige of universities and play an important role in setting Engineering and Technology
directions for future development.  6 steps for how to publish a journals
Nevertheless, bibliographic databases are not only used by governors or by the Monthly published scopus indexed
administration of universities to evaluate scientific advances, distribute funds or journals in engineering
manage educational policies.

For a list of Scopus publications journals and Web of Science journals, visit the
IFERP website. 
Get More Details About
The majority of daily users of databases are –  IFERP App
librarians, 
 students,  Your name

lecturers, and 
researchers, 
Your email

who exploit databases for other, more informal purposes because these days, such data
sources have evolved from being simple publication metadata repositories to more
complex networks incorporating detailed –
Mobile Number

publication information, 
citation data, 
bibliometric indicators,  SUBMIT
journals, authors, 
institutions, as well as their 
analysis tools. 

Thus, databases are used not only to search for the most relevant literature and
select journals to publish or subscribe to but also to –  Introduction to IFERP: Accel…
Accel…
track personal careers, 
identify opportunities for collaboration or funding, etc. 
In such cases, the convenience and performance of the database’s web interface and
additional features provided can also significantly influence database preference.

00:00 04:09
Comparing Scopus Publications & WoS Publications

Content Coverage & Citations

The breadth and completeness of the content covered is the most important
feature of DB for obtaining reliable results. 
Obviously, both databases certainly offer broad coverage of the highest quality
journals, as well as additional analysis tools for fast publication journals and
citations. 
 Both WoS and Scopus provide broad coverage of the disciplines of nature, MOST POPULAR POST
medicine, health sciences, engineering, and technology and, therefore, could be
used in research assessments of these disciplines.  Fast publishing list of scopus indexed
journals
On the other hand, the literature coverage of certain disciplines or fields in selective
bibliographic databases should be assessed with extra care, as it strongly depends on  Guide for how to publish paper in scopus
several other aspects of coverage, such as indexed sources and types of documents
and coverage of non-English language editions.   What are steps to submit paper in
However, although WoS and Scopus have made notable efforts to expand their Google Scholar journal
coverage, particularly over the past decade, even the most recent studies have
shown no significant improvement in book and conference proceedings coverage,  Best International conference with
concluding that the coverage of these types of documents is still insufficient for Scopus publications

reliable analyzes or assessments in the disciplines where these types of sources are
most prevalent.   How to easily publish a research paper in
journals
The same goes for coverage of non-English language publications and sources of
regional importance. 
Therefore, the main biases towards the over-representation of English-language
sources, the uneven representation of countries, and the under-representation of
SSH literature remain the main limitations of these data sources. 
Nevertheless, several studies have shown that Scopus offers broader coverage, both
publications, and citations, across all major fields and document types, as well as a
better representation of non-English and regional literature. 
Thus, Scopus might be a better choice to carry out tasks in the context of arts and
humanities and focus on more innovative and nationally-oriented research, especially
when it comes to evaluating the quality of sources in these contexts since WoS does
not provide impact metrics for these sources.
Meanwhile, the depth of coverage, especially when it comes to citations, is generally
better in WoS. 
However, in some cases, the time to access citation data in WoS publications maybe
even shorter than in Scopus publications due to content access limitations resulting
from time restrictions stated in the subscription terms. 
The same restrictions also apply to posting data.

Additionally, the indexes accessible through the WoS CC subscription may also vary. 
Thus, although the possibility of modulating the WoS subscription offers institutions
the possibility of paying just for the most pertinent content, these variations in the
availability of WoS content make it very difficult to guarantee the reproducibility of
any analyzes carried out from the WoS data. 
Variable access to WoS content can also make an assessment of WoS’s suitability for
a particular task misleading when based on information provided by the database
owner. 
Therefore, the official descriptive information of the WoS, as well as any type of
results obtained from the WoS, should be evaluated with caution. 
 Apart from this, the ability to use databases as data sources for large-scale literature
reviews can also be hampered by certain limitations in data export and accessibility. 
Nevertheless, Scopus seems to provide better and easier access to data.

Content Quality
Due to the widespread practice of evaluating research according to the quality of
scientific output, the quality of the journal becomes a leading criterion in picking a
journal for publications, as the quality of research is currently evaluated by the
quality of the journal in which it was published. 
The issue of journal quality has become even more important with the growing
interest in open access (OA) publishing. 
This publication model aims to allow scientific content to be freely accessible to
the public without the obligation of subscribing to a journal. 
In fact, in accordance with the Plan S initiated by the European Science
Foundation, a number of countries already apply an obligation to publish publicly
funded research according to the OA model. 
However, although open access publication is very beneficial because open access
makes scientific research more – 
visible, 
transparent,  
reproducible, 

and also lessens the time it takes for the publication to be available online,

the unintended but possible effects of the OA on research and journal quality have
become questioned.

However, the quality of content indexed in databases is defined not only by the
quality of the indexed sources but even more so by the quality of the metadata
provided, particularly for bibliometric analyses. 
Like any other platform hosting huge datasets, bibliographic databases are also not
error-free. 
A lot of them occur due to the automatic loading of data into databases as machines
sometimes fail to recognize and transfer data correctly. 
On the other hand, some errors may be caused by authors or editors even before the
metadata is imported into the databases. 
Nevertheless, any discrepancies in publication metadata, source information, or
other inconsistencies occurring in the databases not only complicate the analysis and
other tasks but can also negatively affect the accuracy and reliability of the results
obtained.

Content Indexing & Inclusion Policies

Traditionally, the high quality of the journal is perceived as its inclusion in WoS and
Scopus, as these databases would index only the highest quality sources carefully
selected under strict screening procedures. 
The CSAB (Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board), which decides upon the
inclusion of Scopus content, is an international group of –
scientists, 
researchers, and 
librarians,
representing major scientific fields. 
In WoS, this task is carried out by an internal editorial development team. 
Both databases publicly declare their content indexing policies, which are
provided separately for various types of sources and are elaborated upon in
numerous descriptive documents.

Nevertheless, Clarivate offers at least three separate documents outlining journal

selection procedures. 
Apart from this, this information is also provided in other documents and websites.
Additionally, the inclusion of books and conference materials is described in
additional documents and separate websites. 
At the same time, the descriptive information of Scopus is more concentrated
because the selection criteria and policies for all types of documents are presented
in general and separate descriptive documents and on a single website.

In both databases, sources are evaluated in several steps. 

When a journal is assessed for inclusion in WoS CC, after the initial screening to
gather general information regarding the assessed source, the journal undergoes
editorial screening, where a set of twenty-eight criteria is applied, including twenty-
four quality criteria and four impact criteria. In Scopus, the evaluation criteria are
grouped into five categories –
journal policy, 
content, 
journal status, 
regularity of publication, and 
online availability. 
However, the main criteria in both databases are the same –
the source has to be peer-reviewed, 
published in a timely manner, 
meet editorial standards, and 
certain citation thresholds indicating its impact. 
In addition, the linguistic criterion exists, requiring that abstracts and titles be
written in English, and the importance of the international relevance of the content
with references listed in roman characters is clearly indicated.

Nevertheless, a recent study of WoS CC journal inclusion criteria showed that WoS CC
coverage not only depends on the general (universalist) inclusion criteria listed above
but can also be potentially influenced by specific characteristics (particular) journals,
such as the –
discipline represented, 
 the language of publication, 
the type of publishing institution,  
the country of residence, and even 
the economic wealth of the country, 

since the majority of journals were published in languages ​other than English and in
smaller countries, and journals representing very specific areas of research, especially
those published by universities, were found to have a lower probability of being
included in WoS CC.

Meanwhile, from the perspective of universalist criteria, it has been observed that
meeting editorial standards does not guarantee inclusion in WoS, while the quality of
journal impact may have greater influence. 
The inclusion of all journals in WoS may be affected by these same determined
biases.

“Predatory” Journals
Today, many publishers and journals exploit the OA model and its attractiveness
to authors to collect APCs (article publishing charges), but they are highly
questionable when it comes to peer review practices and overall reliability. 
These highly dubious publishers and reviews are most often referred to as
“predators”, but they can also be referred to as “pseudo”, “fake” or “pirated”.

Predatory journals usually exploit names and other details, even web pages of
credible reviews. 
Thus, it is often very difficult to determine the credibility of the journal. 
On the other hand, several characteristics can signal a possible predatory nature of a
journal. 
For example, the APC fees of predatory journals are usually much lower than those
charged by credible OA journals. 
Additionally, authors are often asked to pay APC only after their manuscript has been
accepted. 
Other characteristics include the absence or questionable location and composition
of journal editorial boards, as their members often lack academic skills. 
Often, predatory journals also do not clearly state manuscript submission, review,
acceptance, and licensing policies. 
In 2012, Jeffrey Beall compiled and published a list of nearly fifty criteria for
identifying predatory publishing and continually updates these criteria and an index
of publishers as well as individual journals meeting these criteria.
Although these criteria are often considered controversial, predatory journals have
generally been shown to meet several of the criteria set out by Beall.

However, there is no common definition that clearly distinguishes between

predatory and credible open access publications. 
Download the IFERP app for access to the best and most reputable Scopus as well
as Web of Science journals around the globe. 

Nevertheless, aiming to index themselves in the DBs in order to create a brand image
and attract more authors, these artificial journals have evolved, and they even
manage to pass the selection process of the large bibliographic ones, as well as OAs,
DBs, and unethical ones, the nature of predatory journals can only be noticed after a
long time. 
For example, in January 2018, Elsevier halted the indexing of 424 journals in Scopus,
citing “publishing issues” and, less commonly, “metrics” as the reason for the halt.

A plausible hypothesis was made that these journals were potentially or actually
predatory. 
More recently, a more detailed review of journals removed from Scopus for
publication reasons was conducted. 
The study indeed confirmed that the majority of abandoned titles could be
considered predatory journals (77% of abandoned journals were included in Beall’s
 blacklist). 
Even so, it has also been determined that the problem of predatory OA appears to be
very limited to the United States and, in a few, primarily to developing countries (e.g.,
India, Pakistan, Turkey, Nigeria). 
Having published in a predatory journal can damage the reputation of the authors. 
Thus, although the open access publishing model offers researchers faster
dissemination and greater visibility of their work when selecting a journal to publish,
open access journals, even those indexed in Scopus and WoS, must be assesed with
caution. 
Attend an online virtual conference to learn more about predatory journals and
how to avoid them. 

Although over the past decade, there has been significant growth in available data
sources and bibliographic metrics, the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus (DB) databases
remain the two primary and most popular sources, complete with publication metadata
and impact indicators. Therefore, they serve as major tools for a variety of tasks – from
journal and literature selection or personal career tracking to large-scale bibliometric
analyzes and research assessment practices at all possible levels. However, since both
publication databases are expensive and fee-based data sources, institutions often have
to choose between them.

Inspite of the fact that the WoS and Scopus databases have been widely compared for
over 15 years, the Scientometric community has yet to come to a verdict on “which is
better”. On the other hand, both databases are constantly being improved due to the
intense competition and the noticeable transfer of academic activities to an Internet-
based digital environment. Therefore, today they encompass so many features and
functionality that it is impossible to draw such a general conclusion because a database
may be a better choice for one purpose but less so for another. Therefore, if an
institution has access to both databases, each member of the institution should be able
to make a personal and informed decision as to which is best for a particular task.
Despite the serious biases and limitations that WoS and Scopus share, in the author’s
opinion, Scopus is better suited both for evaluating search results and for performing
day-to-day tasks for several reasons. 

First, Scopus offers broader and more inclusive content coverage. 

Second, the availability of individual profiles for all authors, institutions, and serial
sources, as well as the interdependent DB interface, make Scopus more convenient
for practical use. 

Additionally, thirdly, the impact indicators implemented perform as well or better

than the measures provided by WoS, are less susceptible to manipulation and are
available for all serial sources across all disciplines.

However, more importantly, Scopus is subscribed as a single database, with no

confusion or additional restrictions regarding content accessibility. Additionally, Scopus
is more open to society, as it provides free access to author and source information,
including metrics. On the other hand, WoS also offers its own set of perks. For example,
it may be more suitable for searching and analyzing open access resources at the
publication level.

Generally, the suitability of DB depends primarily on the objectives and application

context of the particular task, including consideration of the required degree of
selectivity and level of aggregation. Nevertheless, academic institutions will be forced
to subscribe to the WoS and Scopus databases, or at least one of them, as long as their
provided metrics remain the core elements of research assessment practices and for
undertaking daily tasks. Therefore, the institution’s choice of DB subscription is
primarily determined by the parameters that have been applied in national and
institutional research assessment policies. On the other hand, since publication and
rating trends, as well as the databases themselves, are not constant, new information
about the suitability of databases for particular ratings may, in turn, suggest changes to
these policies. In any case, changes in review policies are needed because the
widespread obligation to publish research results only in Web of Science journals and
Scopus journals and the fact that the careers and salaries of researchers often depend
on the number of these publications inevitably affect their behavior, shifting their focus
from quality to quantity, which poses a threat to the overall quality of science.

« All You Need To Know About Predatory Conferences & How To Avoid Them
A Complete Overview Of The Typical Peer Review Process In Scientific Journal Publishing »

ONE COMMENT

Gsa Ser Proxies says:

May 1, 2022 at 7:30 am

I like the helpful info you provide in your articles.

I will bookmark your blog and check again here regularly.

I’m quite sure I’ll earn plenty of new stuff right here!

Best of luck for the next!

Comments are closed.

All Right Reseved by IFERP