Category: en

What is SJR?

The SJR (Scimago Journal Rank) is a metric that measures the prestige and impact of scientific journals. It is based on the concept of prestige transfer via citation links. Developed by the Scimago Lab, the metric ranks journals based on the citations received by their articles and the SJR scores of the citing journals. The SJR metric considers not only the total number of citations but also the quality of the citing journals as the subject field, quality and reputation of the journal have a direct effect on the citation of SJR.

A higher SJR score indicates that a journal has received more citations from other prestigious journals, signifying a higher level of influence and impact within the scientific community. However, the Scimago Journal Rank is just one of many metrics utilised to evaluate the quality and impact of scientific journals, and it should be considered alongside other measures such as the impact factor, h-index, and expert opinion when assessing the significance of a journal.

Why should you utilise SJR?

The Scimago Journal Rank is a public resource, meaning no subscription is needed to access and view any journal’s rank or score. SJR covers all disciplines, taking into account all relevant aspects of a journal tailored to the subject area. Moreover, the rankings are optimised to factor in the differences in citation behaviour between disciplines. It can be argued that SJR is a well-rounded metric, here are some key benefits of utilising it:

• Evaluate journal quality

 SJR provides a quantitative measure of the prestige and impact of scientific journals. The score considers both the number of citations received by a journal and the quality of the citing journal. By utilising SJR, you can easily assess the relative importance and influence of different journals within a discipline.

• Identify influential journals

 SJR scores journals based on their impact and visibility within the scientific community. The score can identify the most influential journals in your area of research, allowing you to target your publications to maximise their impact and reach.

• Compare journals within a field 

SJR provides a comprehensive comparison of different journals within a discipline. You can assess the standing and ranks of journals based on their SJR scores and determine which ones are more widely recognised by the scientific community.

• Benchmark research output

SJR also provides rankings at national and institutional levels. It can assist in benchmarking the research output of different countries or institutions, enabling you to assess their scientific productivity.

• Stay updated on scientific trends

By regularly consulting SJR, you can keep track of the evolving landscape of scientific journals, including emerging journals, new research areas, and trends within your field of interest.

How is SJR calculated? 

The SJR (Scimago Journal Rank) is calculated using a methodology that counts the number of citations a journal receives. The source of citations is also taken into account; citations from prestigious citing journals. The steps involved in calculating the SJR score are:

1. Collection of data: The methodology is initiated by collecting data on citations from Scopus, which is a comprehensive bibliographic database of scientific literature.
2. Weighting citations: Each citation received by an article within the journal is weighted based on the importance of the citing journal. The methodology considers the SJR of the citing journal as an indicator of its prestige. Higher-ranked journals contribute more to the SJR score of the journal being evaluated.
3. Normalisation: To account for differences in citation practices between fields of study, the SJR algorithm implements a normalisation process. This process adjusts variations in citation patterns and citation potential across different disciplines.
4. Prestige of the citing journals: Journals that receive citations from more prestigious and influential journals are given higher weight in the calculation.
5. Journal self-citations: Self-citations, which are citations made by a journal to its own articles, are excluded from the SJR calculation. This ensures that self-referencing does not influence a journal’s SJR score.
6. Iterative calculation: The Scimago Journal Rank is calculated iteratively, taking into account the rank scores of the citing journals. This iterative process helps adjust the scores and establish a relative ranking of journals within specific subject categories.

What are the limitations of SJR?

While the SJR (Scimago Journal Rank) metric is widely used and provides valuable insights regarding the impact of scientific journals, it is important to consider its limitations. Some of the limitations of the SJR metric are:

• Subjectivity of Journal Rankings

 The rankings provided by SJR are based on algorithms that consider citation data and the prestige of citing journals. However, the determination of prestige is subjective and can vary across different research communities or disciplines. The choice of specific journals in the Scopus database can also have biases in the rankings.

• Limited Coverage

SJR relies on the Scopus database for citation data, which may not include all journals across all disciplines. Certain fields or niche journals may be underrepresented in the database, leading to an incomplete representation of the research landscape.

• Focus on Citations

SJR heavily relies on citation data as the primary focus of a journal’s impact. While citations can be a significant unit of measurement, they do not capture other aspects of a journal’s quality, such as editorial standards, scientific rigour, or societal impact. The metric does not assess factors like the published research’s novelty, originality, or practical applicability.

• Time Lag

SJR scores are updated annually, which means there can be a time lag in reflecting the most recent developments and impact of journals. This delay may not capture the immediate influence of newly published research.

• Field Normalisation Challenges

While the Scimago Journal Rank attempts to normalise citations across different fields, variations in citation practices and publishing patterns can still have biases. Certain disciplines may have higher citation rates due to their nature or popularity, leading to potential imbalances in the rankings.

• Limited Transparency

The specific details of the algorithm used to calculate SJR scores, including the weighting and normalisation methods, are proprietary information and not publicly disclosed. This lack of transparency can make it difficult to fully understand and critique the metric.

What is the difference between Scimago Journal Rank and Journal Impact Factor?

The journal impact factor is a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year. It is used to measure the importance or rank of a journal by calculating the times its articles are cited. The calculation is based on a two-year period and involves dividing the number of times articles were cited by the number of articles that are citable.

The main differentiating point of SJR and Journal Impact Factor is that the Scimago Journal Rank measures prestige and Journal Impact Factor measures citation impact. Both metrics utilise citations to settle a journal’s score. Moreover, both metrics rely on different databases, SJR relies on Scopus while Journal Impact Factor relies on Journal Citation Reports (JCR), these well-reputed databases assist the algorithms with which each score is decided. Additionally, SJR scores are optimised to compare journals across disciplines while the journal impact factor is not; using this metric you may only compare journals within one discipline. 

In conclusion, the Scimago Journal Rank is a valuable metric that determines the prestige of a specific journal. This article explored why as researchers, you should be utilising SJR and how it is calculated while highlighting the metric’s limitations. To help you gain a better understanding, the article also included a brief comparison between the Scimago Journal Rank and Journal Impact Factor. While SJR is arguably a well-rounded metric, it should not be the only method of analysis and should be considered along with other metrics and expert opinions to draw final conclusions about a specific journal. 

Valuable scientific research papers are usually stored behind paywalls. Sci-Hub is a platform that emerged in 2011 as a means to ‘remove all barriers in science’ while the initiative and establishment of Sci-Hub made strides within the open access movement, various questions and concerns have been raised about piracy and intellectual rights infringements as well is how the future of research will be impacted. From individual authors and researchers to publishing giants, this blog presents a comprehensive framework of the strengths and limitations of platforms like Sci-Hub. 

What is Sci-Hub? 

Sci-Hub is a website that provides free access to scientific research papers and academic articles that are behind paywalls. It was founded by Alexandra Elbakyan in 2011, with the goal of making scientific knowledge accessible to anyone, regardless of their financial resources or institutional affiliations. The site uses proxy servers to bypass the paywalls of major scientific publishers and provide users with free access to articles that would otherwise require a paid subscription. The use of Sci-Hub is controversial, as it is illegal in many countries and has been the subject of lawsuits by major publishers. However, it has also gained a large following among researchers and scholars who see it as a way to access scientific research.

Why so many are attracted to Sci-Hub?

An eminent argument is that Sci-Hub disseminates scientific research papers within emerging regions globally, this is done with no restrictions and in an effort to enhance the accessibility of research. As an open access platform, the establishment of Sci-Hub adds pressure on publishers, libraries and databases alike to provide open access alternatives to level the field within academia. 

Providing access to high-quality scientific research in emerging countries not only promotes equality within academia but also has the potential to increase the contribution from these countries and provide new perspectives and areas of study within research communities. Moreover, research papers are undoubtedly impacted positively by increased visibility and transparency.

Why is Sci-Hub controversial?

As Sci-Hub gains popularity, it is a controversial platform known to part-take in copyright infringement. The platform operates by providing free access to scientific research papers that are behind paywalls. By bypassing these restrictions, Sci-Hub has published and disseminated a vast collection of copyrighted material without the permission of publishers, making it a hub for copyright infringement. 

Due to Sci-Hub operating outside the traditional publishing model and obtaining its content illegally, this flags significant quality control issues; without the peer review process and editorial supervision provided by reputable journals, there is a concern about the research being disseminated by Sci-Hub.

While Sci-Hub has gained popularity; Sci-Hub also does not provide key metrics. This impacts the revenue streams of publishers and individual authors as the metrics to track and produce credibility are not taken into account. This lost data has the potential to negatively impact current and future research communities. Metrics like downloads and citations are significant to assessing a researcher’s credibility and career, Sci-Hub does not allow researchers or readers to access this information which creates a roadblock for research communities to operate on reliable metrics.

Furthermore, Sci-Hub undermines traditional publishing methods. Due to the platform not relying on article fees and subscriptions; the platform cannot fund the dissemination of quality scientific research. While Sci-Hub’s mission is to increase accessibility, this can be challenging as the platform has been banned in several countries because of Sci-Hub’s illegal methods of obtaining content, it is worth mentioning that the platform has been accused of using email phishing methods and gaining access to 42 university databases. In addition, the research available on Sci-Hub is not reviewed or updated making the research old and less relevant. 

What actions can the research industry take? 

Undoubtedly, platforms like Sci-Hub exist because of the gaps present in the research sector. To discourage the use of illegal platforms like Sci-Hub, the research industry can take several significant actions, such as making research papers more affordable and widely available, improving the quality and scope of open access research papers, negotiating better deals with publishers, and substantially increasing public funding for research. Additionally, researchers can publish their work in open access journals or deposit their manuscripts in institutional repositories, which can make their work more accessible. An increase in awareness about the implications on the research community of using pirated content can also help discourage the use of sites like Sci-Hub by readers and learners.

In conclusion, the principle that Sci-Hub was built on is to grant access to emerging regions, low-income students and researchers to the world of scientific research. While this is an admirable foundation, the dismissal of the established processes in the industry is harmful to the future of researchers. To significantly reduce the usage of pirated platforms, all stakeholders in the publishing spectrum must work together to create and promote affordable and accessible models of dissemination.

Discover millions of journal articles, e-books, proceedings and so much more now on Zendy.

In the current data-driven era, the importance of analytics in academic research cannot be overstated. Analytics help determine editorial decisions and give publishers insight into how their publications are being consumed, making analytics an indispensable tool for researchers across both STEM and HSS fields. In this blog, we assess and explore how analytics enable researchers to extract insights and make evidence-based decisions while also considering the benefits and limitations of analytics within academic research.

Benefits of analytics

• Analytics within academic research provides insight into how research papers are being utilised by readers, taking into account the platforms the research is being consumed on, the citations it receives and how it is being shared.
• Analysing metrics relevant to academic research helps to identify author and reader behaviour. This results in informed editorial decisions, along with better 
• Analytics also allow academic research publishers to streamline their workflow by calculating submission and acceptance timelines. This also has the potential to depict and analyse peer-review times and provides a thorough analysis of the data mentioned within a manuscript submission.
• Identifying the most cited research within a specific discipline can benefit authors’ own academic research with accurate sources from well-reputed journals and/or authors.

Consuming academic research from legal platforms which respect copyright guidelines aid publishers in collecting accurate data to produce and publish new academic research papers. Furthermore, this collection of data and metrics aids researchers advance within their careers as it helps establish researcher credibility through H-index scores and other metrics. 

Drawbacks of analytics

• The collection and analysis of reader data to depict usage and engagement can raise privacy concerns especially if personal details are also extracted.
• The data collected within academic research can be biased or misinterpreted if not examined rigorously. For example, data on citations and downloads may not accurately convey the impact of research but rather the popularity of the author or journal.
• The growth of analytics in academic research may create an overreliance on metrics. This can potentially shift the focus to trending topics and authors rather than original, relevant and impactful research.
• Currently, there is no standard method for collecting and reporting analytical data within academic research. This lack of standardisation leaves room for misinterpretation, fabrication and biased numbers.

Platforms like Z-library, which provide free but illegal access to academic research and publications, pose a threat to the analytics used by publishers. Z Library bypasses traditional publishing by engaging in the unauthorised sharing of copyrighted content. It hosts digital copies of books without the explicit permission of the authors or publishers. This violates copyright laws and intellectual property rights. This can undermine the ability of publishers to make data-driven decisions about which articles to publish and promote, and can also affect the accuracy of analytics data. Which in turn affects the measurement of the true impact of academic research publications.

In conclusion, the growth of analytics within academic research is undeniable. While metrics allow publishers, authors and readers to depict how accurate their sources are and how well their research papers are performing, this comes at the cost of potential privacy concerns, fabrication of data and the lack of a standardised approach to collecting and reporting analytical data. However, investing time and resources to establish safe practices that produce accurate metrics can greatly benefit all parties involved in academic research; publishers can use this data to cater to readers by creating personalised lists and recommendations while also encouraging researchers to work within certain subject areas across different disciplines.

Discover millions of journal articles, e-books, proceedings and so much more now on Zendy.