Scopus Editor Workshop

Preparing your journal for submission to Scopus

October 20th, 2022

Bali, Indonesia
 Who am I?

Alexander van Servellen

Senior Consultant, Research Intelligence
Elsevier, Singapore
a.vanservellen@Elsevier.com

• Senior Consultant for Research Intelligence at Elsevier.

• Helped launch Elsevier’s research analytics capabilities (2009-2012) from Elsevier HQ in NL
• Living and Singapore since 2013 supporting Academic & Government use of Research Analytics
• MSc in Developmental Psychology, from University of Amsterdam,
• with Elsevier since 2008

• My grandfather was an Indonesian from central Java (Purwokerto) who worked at Bank
Indonesia in the 1960’s. My mother is half-Dutch half-Indonesian born in Jakarta
My Indonesian grandfather went to study in Holland in 1930's
He got stuck there when Germany occupied Holland for 5-years.
He fell in love with a Dutch women and married her at the end of the war
They moved to Indonesia and started a family
Agenda

Introduction 1

Scopus content selection process 2

Criteria Deep Dive 3

Acceptance & Rejection letters 4

Digital Commons – journal management 5

Predatory Publishing & Re-evaluation 6

Opening Survey. Takes just 2 minutes.

https://bit.ly/3MD5UUP
Brief Introduction
Research Intelligence FLEXIBLE
MODULAR
Scopus

SciVal
for every step of the research lifecycle OFFERING Overview, Benchmarking,
Collaboration & Trends

KEY CUSTOMER BENEFITS Funding Institutional

Getting started
Easy implementation Pure

& onboarding RIM System

Pure
Customer Experience Award Management
Dedicated consultants, PRODUCTS
Pure
centralized learning & support
Community
Open Ecosystem
Data Monitor
Pure
Interoperable products, data Analytical Services Portal
& services connected via APIs Science-Metrix Expert Lookup
Digital Commons
User Experience Institutional Repository
Integrated product journeys
with coherent accessible UI’s Enabling Technologies Digital Commons

Advanced Data Science Machine Learning Text and Data Mining

Data
Our People – “We can relate” Digital Commons
Artificial Neural Networks Big Data Technology
Many PhD’s with global connections Publishing
Natural Language Processing Semantic Technology
forming experienced teams Local Data
Metrics and Indicators Entity Resolution
Abstract and
Open API’s Single Identity
citation data
PlumX Metrics SERVICES
Full-text articles
Funding Data DATA 3rd Party Data
• Crossref
Custom Analytics
SOURCES
• Unpaywall Media mentions
Consulting Services
• Pubmed
Patent Data
Research Datasets • ORCID
Profile Refinement Services
Scopus uniquely combines a comprehensive, curated abstract and
citation database with enriched data and linked scholarly content.

Identify and analyze which

85 million+ journals to read/submit to
Items
Track and assess a researcher’s
impact

25,751+ Decide what, where and with

1.7 billion cited references
Serial titles whom to collaborate
dating back to 1970

Track impact of research and

235,000+ monitor global research trends
Books
7,000+ Find the current research; what has been
Publishers published in a research area
80,000 17 million
Affiliation profiles Author profiles
Determine how to differentiate
research topics, find ideas

Quickly find relevant and trusted research, identify experts, and access reliable data,
metrics and analytical tools to support confident decisions around research strategy –
all from one database and one subscription.
Tools that meet you where you are, so you can remain focused on
what’s most important
The same trusted data; many ways to access

Scopus.com Profiles Research APIs Custom data

Scopus.com is built for
ease of access, speed,
and visibility of the most
important content
needed to review
literature in connection
with authors, institutions,
funders, and more.
Scopus is the premier
metrics Many of the Scopus Scopus data leads in
source of profiles. It is APIs can be used in quality and quantity.
the only database that Scopus offers more conjunction with each That’s why it’s the go-to
implements algorithmic research metrics — and on other via common resource for global
and systematic author nearly twice the number of identifiers, e.g. DOIs or evaluations, rankings,
and affiliation peer-reviewed publications author IDs. reporting, landscape
disambiguation. — than any other abstract analyses and other
& citation database. strategic efforts.
CiteScore 2021 Highlights
 Only 40% of the journals in Scopus are from the big publishers (e.g. 11% Elsevier). 60% of
the journals are smaller publishers and university journals.

Scopus delivers
a
comprehensive
view on the
world of
research

No packages,
no add-ons.

One all-inclusive
subscription

*Counts September 2017

Maintaining high-quality:
Scopus rigorous re-evaluation process and criteria
• Less than half of the reviewed titles are selected for Scopus coverage.
• The Content Selection Advisory Board is selective and strict on quality.
 Expert Curated content selection by the independent Content
Selection & Advisory Board (CSAB)

• The CSAB is an independent board of subject experts from all over the world.
• Comprised of 17 Subject Chairs.
• Board members are chosen for their expertise in specific subject areas; many
Scopus mandate and authority is at the journal level

Scopus is committed to creating a representative, curated dataset of scholarly

content:
• Overall journal selection based on journal-level data and performance
• Monitoring and deselection of titles that are predatory or below standards

Scopus cannot interfere with editorial autonomy of journals:

• Editorial decisions on quality of individual articles and conferences
• (Scientific) content of the articles and abstracts included in the database
• Plagiarism and other publication malpractice of individual articles
• Authorship of the paper

Note:
If publication malpractice is occurring knowingly and on a structural basis without policy to address and
prevent such cases, Scopus will flag, re-evaluate and potentially discontinue titles
 Transparent Scopus selection criteria for serial content

1) All titles should meet all technical criteria in order to be considered for Scopus review:

Peer-review English abstracts Regular publication Roman script Publication ethics

with 2 years history references statement
with ISSN

2) Eligible titles are reviewed by the CSAB according to 14 selection criteria:

Journal Policy Quality of Content Journal Standing Regularity Online Availability

• Convincing editorial • Academic • Citedness of journal • No delay in • Content available

concept/policy contribution to the field articles in Scopus publication schedule online
• Type of peer-review • Clarity of abstracts • Editor standing • English-language
• Diversity geographic • Quality and journal home page
distribution of editors conformity with stated • Quality of home
• Diversity geographic aims & scope page
distribution of authors • Readability of
articles
Scopus Coverage Summary (2022)
Global representation means global discovery across all subjects and content types
85.6M records from 27.1K serials, 140K conferences and 253K books
from more than 7,000 publishers in 105 countries
• Updated daily—approximately 11,000 articles per day indexed
• 18.40M open access documents
• “Articles in Press” from >8,740 titles 106 active Indonesian journals in Scopus
• 1.10M preprints from multiple preprint servers
• 5,408 active Gold Open Access journals indexed
Number of journals by
subject area** Journals Conferences Books Patents
Physical sciences 25,837** active peer-reviewed 140K conference 63.3K individual book 47.4M patents
9,056 journals events series volumes
5 major patent offices:
247 trade journals 11.03M conference 253K stand-alone
Health sciences papers books • WIPO
7,596
5,408 Gold OA Journals
• EPO
(DOAJ/ROAD) 2.35M total book
• USPTO
items
17.0M fully-indexed funding • JPO
Social sciences acknowledgements • UK IPO
11,526
1.10M preprints Focus on Social
Mainly Engineering and Sciences and A&H
• Full metadata, abstracts and cited Computer Sciences
Life sciences
references (refs post-1970 only)
5,164
• Citations back to 1970

*Journals may be classified in multiple subject areas: this count includes current actively indexed titles only
**Total number of Scopus journals in database including inactive titles is 42,474
 Between 2018-2022 Indonesia submitted 506 journals to Scopus
84% of which were rejected.
Country Percentage REJECTED
Pakistan 31 166 Pakistan 84%
Romania 32 108 Romania 77%
Ukraine 62 211 Ukraine 77%
Indonesia 79 427 Indonesia 84%
Canada 82 62 Canada 43%
Brazil 88 176 Brazil 67%
Turkey 89 429 Turkey 83%
Singapore 92 48 Singapore 34%
South Korea 96 104 South Korea 52%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 128 217
Iran 63%
India 143 723
India 83%
Italy 159 181
Italy 53%
Poland 203 279
Poland 58%
Germany 207 79
Germany 28%
Spain 225 214
Spain 49%
China 237 84
China 26%
Russian Federation 271 428
Russian Federation 61%
Netherlands 288 35
Switzerland 363 60
Netherlands 11%
United States 787 398 Switzerland 14%
United Kingdom 790 188 United States 34%
United Kingdom 19%
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Accepted Rejected
Elsevier supports ambitious journals in several ways, but I
welcome any initiatives that could help Indonesia’s journals.

Local Scopus boards Professional Editor Visibility and workflow

workshops
▪ Local content selection ▪ Visibility and workflow is
important to success of any
boards in: ▪ Key support mechanism for
▪ Thailand ambitious journal
local journals to improve
▪ China
▪ Korea ▪ A new addition to how
▪ Collaborative effort
▪ Russia Elsevier can support journals
between Elsevier and
is Digital Commons
government agencies or
local citation indexes
▪ Digital Commons can help
improve visibility and impact
of journals

SVS
Scopus content selection process
Scopus Title Submission Workflow

As a primary publisher and information aggregator, Elsevier understands the needs of Authors, Editors and Publishers and provides
resources to support the community. Available resources to help journals with successful title review process:

publication ethics resources | FAQs | advisory documents | reviewer comments | editor and publishing services
https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content/content-policy-and-selection or titlesuggestion@scopus.com
The decision

The decision is the audited and sole responsibility of the Subject Chair of the CSAB.

Acceptance: journal will be covered in Scopus from year of selection going forward

Rejection: journal is not selected for Scopus and can be suggested for review again once
the embargo period has passed (several months up to 5 years) and review comments are
addressed.

The decision letter is accompanied by supporting reasons and where relevant advice on
improvement.
Ready for Scopus self pre-evaluation tool
www.readyforscopus.com
 Ready for Scopus self pre-evaluation tool
www.readyforscopus.com

Poll 5
Scopus Criteria Deep
Dive
 Let’s look at the Scopus criteria in detail

1) All titles should meet all technical criteria in order to be considered for Scopus review:

Peer-review English abstracts Regular publication Roman script Publication ethics

with 2 years history references statement
with ISSN

2) Eligible titles are reviewed by the CSAB according to 14 selection criteria:

Journal Policy Quality of Content Journal Standing Regularity Online Availability

• Convincing editorial • Academic • Citedness of journal • No delay in • Content available

concept/policy contribution to the field articles in Scopus publication schedule online
• Type of peer-review • Clarity of abstracts • Editor standing • English-language
• Diversity geographic • Quality and journal home page
distribution of editors conformity with stated • Quality of home
• Diversity geographic aims & scope page
distribution of authors • Readability of
articles
Scopus: selection criteria and process

Editorial scope and vision for the journal

• Not convincing / Poor / Fair / Good / Excellent

Aims and
Scope of the
journal

Many of the other criteria are evaluated in context

of the stated aims and scope of the journal

Journal Policy
 Aims and Scope are central part of
any journal and should be considered
carefully

Aims and scope can be compelling

Aims and and inspiring offering reader clarity on
Scope mission and value of the journal

Often aims and scope may be lacking

conviction and detail and may seem
vague to readers and evaluators

Journal Policy
 Is my journal International or Local?
1. Is my editorial board very internationally diverse?
2. Do we publish authors from many different countries?
3. Are the topics we cover relevant to more than one country or region?

If the answers to these questions are “No” then your journal is not
international. But good local journals can also be accepted into Scopus

Journal Policy
Don't try and be an International journal if
you are not. Focus on your uniqueness.

• Relevance to an international audience is not the same as

being international
• Do not call a journal “International Journal of ” unless
topics, editors, authors are international.
• Unique local content may be relevant to an international
audience and be attractive for Scopus or other
international databases

Example of a local topic journals recently accepted to Scopus

Journal of the Siam Society
Owner: The Siam Society under Royal Patronage Journal Policy
 About the Journal
The Journal of the Siam Society is published by the Siam Society under Royal
Patronage, one of Thailand’s oldest and most active learned organizations. At the
Society’s foundation in 1904, it was resolved that “The objects of the Society shall be
the investigation and encouragement of Art, Science and Literature in relation to
neighbouring countries.” In 1924, the Society adopted the motto “Knowledge gives rise
to friendship.”
The Journal of the Siam Society has been published continuously since 1904.
The Journal publishes original articles of a scholarly nature on Thailand and
neighbouring countries in a wide range of disciplines including archaeology, epigraphy,
history, ethnology, religion, language, literature, art and architecture, and performing
arts.

Journal Policy
Scopus: selection criteria and process

Type of peer-review (peer review is Mandatory)

• Open peer review: Reviewers are aware of the identity of

the authors, and authors are also aware of the identity of
reviewers.

• Single-blind peer review: Reviewers are aware of the

identity of the authors, but authors are unaware of the
identity of reviewers.

Peer Review • Double-blind peer review: Reviewers are unaware of the

identity of the authors. Authors are unaware of the
identity of reviewers.

Journal homepage should provide detailed

information about type of Peer Review and inspire
trust in the process.
Journal Policy
 What is Questionable Peer
Review?
• Single review by main editor
• Very fast reviews: 2 weeks or less, guaranteed
• New journal with rapidly increasing volume
• Case of author who served as his own referee

Looks suspicious Journal Policy

Scopus: selection criteria and process

Diversity in geographic distribution of Editor & Editorial Board (as

appropriate to the aims and scope of a title):

• No editorial board;
• Regional diversity of editorial board is not in line with
Diversity of editorial concept;
• Regional diversity of editorial board is partly in line with
the Editors editorial concept
• Regional diversity of editorial board is entirely in line with
editorial concept

BUT We recognize that editorial boards and members may be

artificial constructs, ineffective, non-contributory, unaware of their
role or even dead.

Journal Policy
Scopus: selection criteria and process

Diversity in geographic distribution of authors

and reviewers:
• Generally required, however some exceptions may
happen, depending on the aims and scope of the journal (a
Diversity of regionally specific subject)

Authors and • Regional diversity of authors is not in line with editorial

concept
Reviewers • Regional diversity of authors is partly in line with
editorial concept

• Regional diversity of authors is entirely in line with

editorial concept

Journal Policy
Scopus: selection criteria and process

Grading and Clarity of abstracts

• The abstract is displayed in Scopus. Its quality of language
& content is of high importance.

• No abstracts;
• Abstract non-English only;
Abstracts • Abstracts in English, but unclear and/or not
enough detail;
• Abstracts in English, fairly clear and/or fairly
detailed;
• Abstracts in English, very clear and detailed

• Keep in mind that high quality Abstracts are absolutely

essential especially for non-English journals

Journal Policy
Scopus: selection criteria and process

Quality of and conformity with stated aims

• Is the actual content of the title in line with the stated aims and
scope of the title?
- Grading: Extremely poor / Poor / Fair / Good / Extremely good

Content of
Readability of articles
the Papers • The quality of sample articles is assessed using two criteria:
• Language (language should be clear)
• Layout and format of text and figures
• - Grading: Extremely poor / Poor / Fair / Good / Extremely good

Quality of Content
Figures, Graphs and Grammar
Tip: Ensure layout
and quality of the
figures is
professional. Aim
high!

• Poor figures, graphs and

grammar are strong indicators
of low standards for
scholarship, peer review and
editorial practice.

Quality of Content 43
 Quality of Content
Academic Contribution
Academic contribution to
to the Field field
• Does this title make a
unique contribution
compared with the existing
literature in the field?
• Good science and
scholarship?
• Merely a publication outlet
for one faculty?
• Publishing all or most
submissions? Acceptance
rate?
 Journal Standing

Citations

Citedness of journal
• How well is this title cited when compared to other titles in the field?
• Is it cited by journals already in Scopus? → REF (“Journal title”)

Grading:
• Not cited / Poorly cited / Fairly cited / Well cited / Extremely well cited

Scopus: selection criteria and process

 Journal Standing

REF ( "Buletin Ekonomi Moneter dan Perbankan" ) OR REF ( "Bulletin of Monetary

Economics and Banking" )

Scopus: selection criteria and process

 Editors

The reputation of the Editor in Chief and his/her

Deputy/Associate
• This can be difficult to assess: a good editor may not have a
high academic profile
• Verify affiliations, up-to-date scholarly output, active or not
• Grading: Very poor standing /Poor standing / Fair standing /
Good standing / Extremely good standing

Tip: Link editor

names on journal
homepage to Scopus
author profile page

Journal Standing
 Regularity
Publishing regularity
Regularity of publication
• Is the number of issues per year consistent? Are increases planned?
• Is the publication delayed, based on the stated publication schedule?
• How often delays happen?
• Are all issues with a similar number of papers or is there a large discrepancy?

• Grading
Tip: Don’t let one
• Poor: delayed by 4 or more issues; volume span across
• Fair: 2-3 issues delayed; more than one year

• Good: 1 issue delayed;

• Extremely good: Published on time
 Availability
Online availability

Content available online

• Some are free and some in access/password protected – no difference.
• Grading: Recent content not available online / Recent content available online

English-language homepage
• How much content is in English? Is the relevant information translated?
• Grading: Not in English / Partly in English / Entirely in English

The quality of the journal homepage

• Does it contain key information about a journal, eg. Aims and Scope, ISSN (and E-ISSN), editorial board members with
affiliations, scientific society, subscription details, publication ethics policies, copyright agreement? Is it professionally designed and
intuitive?

• Grading: No homepage / Extremely poor / Poor; Fair / Good; Extremely good

 PEMS

Mandatory for all indexed journals, not only to have the

statement but to live by the principles. The CSAB wants
Publication to select journals which comply with PEMS.

Ethics and
PEMS needs to comprehensively describe the scope of
Malpractice responsibilities and rights of editors, authors and
reviewers, as well as include information about
Statement consequences in case misconduct takes place.

https://publicationethics.org/ (COPE)
 Tip on PDF Papers
Front page ideally should include
affiliation of the authors
journal name, volume, Date received, accepted,
author names clearly linked to each
issue, and pages reviewed.
author

The format and information in the PDF should be consistent

with the article page on the homepage. We often see different
information and/or format in the PDF than the article page.
Journal Homepage
• Journal homepage is the first place CSAB
chair goes once they receive a submission
• The impression the homepage leaves, and to
what degree it demonstrates your quality
and how well you meet the criteria makes a
difference
 What we look for on the journal website
•Recognized experts,
Editorial Board transparent who are
Archiving •Digital preservation is
member indicated

Author and Author •Participate in peer-

review, unique, good Ownership & •Clear who owns and
manages the journal, not
responsibility standards Management misleading

Peer Review •All content subject to

•Relevant information
review, objective, no
Process conflict of interest Website available and according
to standards

•Measures to prevent
Publication Ethics misconduct, procedures Publication •Periodicity clearly
to address misconduct indicated
schedule
•Clearly describe
Copyright and copyright and access, •Name is clear, unique
Access possible fees clearly Name of journal and not misleading or
stated confusing
Acceptance &
Rejection
letters
 Example Journal A from Indonesia
Subjects: Arts & Humanities
Evaluation results: Reject
Embargo Period: 2 years

Message to Publisher:
At present articles are hardly ever being cited according to SCOPUS data. If members of the editorial board and no-one else is citing a journal how can we be sure
it caters to an international scholarly audience? Steps need to be taken to ensure that the journal is an international endeavour.
The first issue is the editorial board, which is either far too regionally based or not sufficiently involved in the running of the journal.

Secondly, the English abstracts are good but might be even more detailed, showing the specific contribution to the research field internationally.
Abstracts are key for scholars who may know little about a journal or an article.

The website is also relatively poor in not giving much information about the rationale for the journal and its significance in research terms.

The subjects covered ought to attract interest internationally. More evidence needs to be provided that it is indeed an international journal. A further problem is
the identity of the journal - some of the articles are short and others come across as weak or peculiar from a scholarly perspective: more defences of a religious
denomination rather than anything else.
The editors are doing SOME of the following but the following steps in general will help going forwards if they want to continue to turn the journal into an
international endeavour.

1. Focus on high quality publication only

2. Having abstracts in English at the beginning of journal articles that are as detailed as possible
3. Consider translating the odd leading article in English
4. Broaden the editorial board as much as possible.
5. Specify the affiliations of the board members and the editors
6. Ensure that those involved in the journal themselves have SCOPUS profiles
7. Broaden authorship internationally
8. Make clear the rationale for the journal in scholars terms on the website. Explain why it is likely to interest scholars internationally
9. Make links with scholars internationally and facilitate their contribution to the journal (i.e. turn the journal itself into something of an intellectual community)
10. Take steps to raise the profile of the journal internationally
 Journal B , accepted title from Indonesia

Subjects: Multidisciplinary; Earth & Planetary Science; Environmental Science

(Partial) Message to Publisher:

The previous review (2011) rejected this title for inclusion in Scopus based on reasons of inadequate editorial policy, poor readability, poor journal
content and the journal not being easily accessible online. It was given a re-application date of 2020 - hence the current application and review. The
journal must be commended for using the intervening years to significantly improve the quality standard of the journal which is outlined in a very
detailed cover letter speaking to and citing evidence of addressing each one of the reasons which formed the basis of its 2011 rejection.

In terms editorial policy, the journal has moved to being fully online with the editorial workflow managed via the Online Journals Systems (OJS)
platform. Editorial policy, based on COPE guidance, has been made transparent and is readily accessible online via the journal's website. Editorial Board
members are eminent scientists in their respective fields and represent the member countries of the xxxxx which is the publisher of the journal. In
terms of readability, the journal "now employs[s] an in-house copyeditor, who oversees the improvement of language quality and advises on all
matters related to article readability".

The journal has also attended to content quality issues through an improved and more specific focus on the journal's purpose of xxxxx. This has been
supported by re-conceptualized author guidelines that emphasize scientific content, as well as a more rigorous and transparent peer review process.
The journal also encourages authorship both within and without the ASEAN region, the latter showing a steady increase. In terms of online accessibility,
the journal is "now hosted on its own dedicated website", with information about the journal, including its editorial policy and Board membership,
readily accessible online.

The journal's content is well presented, with DOIs for each research article for discoverability and accessibility and also well grounded in expansive
literature. The journal is encouraged to indicate for each paper dates of submission, revision, acceptance and publication as a demonstration of rigor of
the peer review process. While citation performance is poor at the moment, it is hoped that with the journal's improved quality standards, this will
improve in the years to come.
 Journal C from South Korea

Subjects: Agricultural & Biological Sciences; medicine; Biochemistry; Genetics & Molecular Biology; Psychology

Evaluation results: Reject

Embargo Period: 2 years

(Partial) Message to Publisher:

The journal was evaluated in 2018. Unfortunately, there remain outstanding issues that need to be addressed before the journal
can be indexed.
1. Articles published in the journal remain poorly cited ….
2. It remains unclear if the journal considers itself an international or a regional journal. ….the origin of the authors should
become more international and not be limited to South Korea. However, it should be made clear that it is not a requirement
for a journal to be an international journal before it can be indexed in Scopus.
3. There remain major concerns with the review process. The external peer review process, i.e., date of submission to the date
of receiving the revised manuscript, can be completed in 2 weeks or less. For example,
4. Information on the academic standing of the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) is not provided, only of the Associate Editors. Without this
information of the EiC, the evaluation process cannot be completed. It is of relevance that EiCs of a scientific journal, and
who have an academic/research position, show a solid academic standing in their discipline as reflected by their overall
publication/citation record.
Example journal D from Indonesia

The journal needs to make improvements in the following areas before the next application.

The language and grammar in some of the abstracts/articles are poor, indicating that peer review and editorial management need to be

strengthened. See an example: reference to specific articles in the journal

The journal shows an uneven scholarly quality in the articles. Some articles are quite general and lack of methodological rigor.

There are no clear guidelines for authors regarding the abstract style and content.

Many of the abstracts do not provide an adequate summary of each article’s content.

Many good international journals already cover management area. The unique contribution of the journal to the academic community is

unclear. The journal needs to strengthen its editorial team and quality control mechanisms.

If in the future these comments are addressed, you may decide to submit a new application at any time after the following date: xxxx.
Example journal E from Indonesia
The title mentioned above has been evaluated for inclusion in Scopus by the Content Selection & Advisory Board (CSAB). The

review of this title is now complete and the CSAB has advised to not accept the title for Scopus inclusion at the present time. For your

information, the reviewer comments are copied below:

This is a promising journal which partly achieves its aims and is a serious candidate for inclusion in Scopus . But not all the articles it

includes are of high quality ( some seem written by those publishing their first tentative thesis –type essays. Please apply again in 2

years showing that more quality control has been exercised. If in the future these comments are addressed, you may decide to submit

a new application at any time after the following date: xxx. At that time, you will be required to upload a cover letter detailing how the

above comments have been addressed.

Digital Commons:
Partnering for Journal
Success on the
Global Stage
October 2022
 Digital Commons – Holistic Publishing Solution
Digital Commons today host more than 2000 journals (97% Open Access and 3% subscription), majority of them are
University led journals

6
1 Intuitive Submission & Workflow Global Visibility & access to impact metrics

2 Dedicated support & 5

Professional & Beautiful Journals
development
3 Ready for new Hosted 4
Easy to use , media Model Digital Commons
fully provides industry-
customizable leading web
workflows , A dedicated consultant discoverability and
Unique editor Platform complies with Support multimedia files, Native for your journal to help SEO.
views, Double & Scopus technical video streaming , Social media plug with implementation, Dashboards for
single blind, requirement, Branding, in available, 99% uptime, Advanced launch, training and authors and editors
Automated design & language support, security protection against cyber ongoing troubleshooting to gain insight into
reminders Customizable Metadata attack , Unlimited usage, and advising readership & usage
Digital Commons has a track record for indexing compliance

While Digital Commons cannot guarantee acceptance to any index, our templates and hosted sites make it easier to comply with indexing requirements
Digital Commons Summary
1. Proven journal outcomes: Journals can grow citations, get ready to apply to more
indexes, and improve journal rankings on Digital Commons

2. Best-in-class visibility: Digital Commons optimizes journals for global

discoverability, and delivers reader analytics for editors and authors

3. Industry-leading editorial system: Option to use new Editorial Manager integration

with reviewer-finder and plagiarism-checking

4. Concierge service: Full-service model options for technical, design, and strategic
advising services

20.10.2022
 6
4

Digital Commons for your Journals

Global Visibility Unlimited Submission Best designed Peer Review Process
Digital Commons for the Journal
Professional Branding & Design Unlimited Submission Consultant Support

Numerous
Journals
Dashboard Strategic Consulting Journal Performance & readership Metrics have been
Digital Commons for the Editor launched on
Option for Editorial Manager Freed of hassle of software maintenance
Digital
Commons &
went on to
get indexed
in Scopus
User-friendly & intuitive Journal Management System Collab & networking
Digital Commons for Authors & Reviewers
Access to Personalized Dashboard Access to metrics Archiving
 Digital Commons in Indonesia
40 Journals are on board Digital Commons Platform.
Visit them here at :
Browse Journals and Peer-Reviewed Series | Scholar
Hub Universitas Indonesia (ui.ac.id)

Bulletin of monetary economics & banking is on Digital Commons

platform; you can find it here Bulletin of Monetary Economics and
Banking | Bank of Indonesia Research (bmeb-bi.org)

They have decided for four of their journals to use Digital Commons
Premier service. The work is in progress.

10/20/2022
Journal Re-Evaluation &
Predatory Publishing

October 2022
Threat to science: Predatory journals are on the rise
Various studies have indicated
that there is an escalation in
predatory journals.
However, it is near impossible
to determine the extent
of predatory journals since they
appear and disappear continually.
In 2015, a study by Shen and
Bjork of Hanken School of
Economics in Finland found more
than 420,000 articles in predatory
journals published between 2010-
2014. This number was up from
53,000 in 2010.
Source: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/10/01/study-finds-huge-increase-articles-published-predatory-journals
 Where did it start?

• Coined by Jeffrey Beall in 2010

• Unofficial ‘watchdog’ of predatory publishing
• Website/blog listed questionable, scholarly open-access ...
www.beallslist.net
• Beall’s definition‘’…journals that ‘prey’ on (often unsuspecting and often
young) scholars to submit their manuscripts for the sole purpose of making
money from these scholars’’
• Criticism for Beall
• Website closed on 17 January 2017

Source: Berger & Cirasella (2015) Beyond Beall’s List: Better understanding predatory publishers
Beall's list (archived):https://beallslist.net/
 Driving forces

• Publish or perish: For many academics, career progression depends on the research
papers they publish.
▪ Technology: Easy to set up a website, spamming thousands of potential authors and
receiving electronic payments
• Inexperience / Online environment: Working online without access to expertise to
distinguish bogus impact factors etc.
• Exploitation of the open access model: Pay-to-publish model misused*

* In ‘’conventional’’ journal publishing, journals generate revenue by selling them to

libraries on a subscription basis. Open-access, on the other hand, often involves
publishers charging an upfront “author fee” to cover costs—then making the
papers available online for free. The open-access movement has produced many
well-respected publishers, including PLoS and BioMed Central as well as
Elsevier!!

Source: Mouton & Valentine (2017) The extent of South African authored articles in predatory journals
Consensus definition of ''Predatory journals''

• The definition of predatory journals has

been contentious.​
• In 2019 a group of researchers met to define
what predatory publishing is and reached
a consensus definition (quoted right)​
• An important part of this statement is
“entities that prioritize self-interest at
the expense of scholarship”.
“Predatory journals and publishers are entities
that prioritize self-interest at the expense of
scholarship and are characterized by false or
misleading information, deviation from best
editorial and publication practices, a lack
of transparency, and/or the use of
aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation
practices.”​

Source: Grudniewics et al. (2019) Predatory journals: no definition, no defence and Cukier et al (2020) Defining predatory journals and
responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
The re-evaluation process

Monitor Curate

Identify titles based on publication

concerns, under performance,
outlier performance or continuous
curation.
In-depth re-evaluation by the Content
Selection & Advisory Board (CSAB)

Flag
 Identifying potential poor quality or predatory journals
All +25k journals in Scopus are monitored on ongoing basis and flagged for reevaluation based on:

1. Our own observation or direct feedback from users and stakeholder’s publication concerns
about the publishing standards or publication ethics of the journal or publisher are investigated.

2. Metrics and benchmarks for publication output, citation impact and self-citations are used to
identify journals that are underperforming compared to peer journals in their field.

3. A machine learning tool analyzes the performance of journals according to aspects like output
growth, changes in author affiliation, citation behavior, etc. to track outlier performance
(=‘RADAR’)

4. During their review, the CSAB can indicate whether any accepted title should be evaluated
again in the future. This data is collected and further analyzed to ensure continuous curation.
 Catch rate broken down by reason of identification
(2016-2020)

Discontinued
990
titles Continued
re-evaluated

434 332 119 105

Reason of
publication under outlier continuous
identification
concerns performance performance curation

Re-evaluation
289 145 165 167 65 54 17 88
decision

67% 50% 55% 16%

Discontinued Discontinued Discontinued Discontinued
“Whether or not a journal is predatory is not a binary decision; there is a
broad spectrum of predatory journal behaviors. To assess whether a
journal should be considered predatory, a number of parameters need
to be considered, often in combination.”

– Prof. Jörg-Rüdiger Sack, Chair of CSAB and Subject Chair for

Computer Sciences.

Prof Jörg-Rüdiger Sack, PhD

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/the-guardians-of-scopus
20-10-2022
What happens with journals for which the decision is made to
discontinue?

• No new content is added to Scopus.

• Content already indexed remains as a matter of scientific record and to ensure stability
and consistency of research trend analytics.
• In exceptional cases of proven severe unethical publication practice, content already
indexed in Scopus may be removed.
• CiteScore will no longer be given for discontinued titles.

An overview of all discontinued journals, is now included in the Source title list which can be
downloaded here: https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/how-scopus-works/content
Example of A Discontinued Title
“It is clearly important to remove journals that are predatory or adopt
poor publishing practices from the Scopus database. It is less clear
what to do with earlier content in the database, particularly as it may
have arisen in periods when the journal was well managed and
represents output from well conducted research.”

– Prof. Peter Brimblecombe, CSAB Subject Chair for Environmental

Science Prof Peter Brimblecombe, PhD

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/the-guardians-of-scopus
20-10-2022
Q&A
Closing Survey. Takes just 2 minutes.

https://bit.ly/3EQmKOe
Thank you
If you need further information, feel free to contact me:

Alexander van Servellen

a.vanservellen@elsevier.com