Ranking journals: could Google Scholar Metrics be an alternative to Journal Citation Reports and Scimago Journal Rank?

• Published in: Learned publishing Vol. 26; no. 2; pp. 101 - 114
• Main Authors: DELGADO‐LÓPEZ‐CÓZAR, Emilio, CABEZAS‐CLAVIJO, Álvaro
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Letchworth ALPSP 01.04.2013; Association of Learned and Professional
• Subjects: Bibliometrics; Exact sciences and technology; Information and communication sciences; Information publishing, dissemination and reproduction; Information science. Documentation; Library and information science. General aspects; Publishing. Electronic publishing. Bibliological aspects; Sciences and techniques of general use; Use and user studies. Information needs; Competition; Policy; Economic analysis; Evaluation; Visualization; Periodical; Search result; Characteristic; Search engine; Coverage; Bibliometric analysis; Indicator; Filing; Bibliometrics; Metric; Cost analysis; Comparative study; Power; Indexing; Tool
• ISSN: 0953-1513; 1741-4857
• DOI: 10.1087/20130206

ABSTRACT The launch of Google Scholar Metrics as a tool for assessing scientific journals may be serious competition for Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports, and for the Scopus‐powered Scimago Journal Rank. A review of these bibliometric journal evaluation products is performed. We compare their main characteristics from different approaches: coverage, indexing policies, search and visualization, bibliometric indicators, results analysis options, economic cost, and differences in their ranking of journals. Despite its shortcomings, Google Scholar Metrics is a helpful tool for authors and editors in identifying core journals. As an increasingly useful tool for ranking scientific journals, it may also challenge established journals products.