Choosing a journal for publication in Web of Science (WoS) requires not only an assessment of its current indexing status, but also a check of the publication’s stability. Indexed journals undergo reassessment and, if they fail to meet the required criteria, usually lose their indexing. Before submitting an article, it is important to carefully assess the publication according to the relevant criteria. What should you pay attention to when checking a scientific journal in Web of Science? We will examine this in our article.
Clarivate regularly reassesses journals according to 24 quality criteria and uses a special artificial intelligence-based tool that helps determine which publication requires review. Below, we will examine the key criteria that are important to consider when checking a journal in WoS.
1. On Hold status in Web of Science
One of the most noticeable signals is the On Hold status in the Master Journal List. It means that new journal content is temporarily not being indexed while the publication undergoes reassessment. The presence of this status does not mean that the journal will automatically be excluded from the database, but it indicates that Web of Science is checking whether the publication complies with its quality criteria. However, according to Clarivate, among journals that have undergone this procedure in recent years, around 85% were ultimately removed from indexing.
2. Problems with peer review and publication quality
Changes in the nature of published materials may indicate increased risk. Particular attention should be paid to journals in which a significant number of articles of questionable scientific quality or materials that poorly correspond to the publication’s stated scope begin to appear. Possible signs include the following:
- publication of articles that do not correspond to the journal’s subject area
- insufficient quality of scientific peer review
- the appearance of a large number of materials of questionable scientific value
- irrelevant or unnatural references in publications
3. A sharp change in the journal’s subject area
Web of Science assesses whether the actual content corresponds to the journal’s stated thematic focus. If a publication begins to publish large numbers of materials from other scientific fields or significantly broadens its scope without a clear justification, this may become grounds for additional review.
Particular attention should be paid to journals whose scope has become excessively broad within a short period or differs significantly from previous issues.
4. Non-transparent editorial policy
An important component of journal assessment is the transparency of its editorial work. Risks may arise if information about the editorial board, publisher or peer-review procedure is incomplete, outdated or contradictory. Such signs may include the following:
- absence of clear peer-review rules
- incomplete information about members of the editorial board
- inconsistency between the editors’ areas of expertise and the subject area of the publication
- non-transparent publication ethics rules
- inaccurate or outdated information on the journal’s website
5. Anomalous citation indicators
Web of Science also analyses the citation patterns of journals. Unnatural citation patterns, including excessive self-citation or systematic citation exchanges between individual publications, may attract increased attention.
At the same time, citation anomalies do not always automatically mean that a journal will be excluded from the Web of Science Core Collection. In some cases, they may become a reason for a separate review or the application of restrictions in Journal Citation Reports.
6. Irregular publication frequency
A journal must adhere to its stated issue publication schedule or established continuous publication model. Prolonged delays, irregular content updates or the cessation of content delivery to Web of Science may create additional risks for continued indexing. Before submitting an article, it is worth checking not only the stated publication frequency, but also the actual publication dates of the latest issues.
7. Sharp changes in the journal’s operation
Publications in which the publisher, editorial management, subject area or publication model has changed within a short period require additional attention. Such changes are not in themselves a violation, but they may affect editorial standards and the quality of the publication. It is therefore advisable to assess the journal over time: compare its previous and latest issues, editorial board composition, article topics and overall approach to publishing materials.
How should risks be assessed before submitting an article?
It is important to assess the combination of factors and check the publication’s current status immediately before submitting a manuscript. This approach helps to avoid situations in which a journal’s status changes during peer review or after an article has been accepted for publication. Regularly checking a publication gives the author an opportunity to better assess publication risks and make a considered choice of journal for their scientific work.
Need help publishing an article in a Web of Science journal? Specialists from Scientific Publications will check the publication’s current status and help you select a journal that corresponds to the profile of your research. To receive a free consultation, complete the form below, and our manager will contact you shortly. Together towards scientific achievements!
