Failures of Scopus

I think it’s time to provide an update on the continuing (lack of) progress getting The Open Journal of Astrophysics properly indexed in Scopus (which markets itself as a purveyor of “metrics you can trust”). You might recall back in June that I reported that OJAp had been included in the index, but unfortunately the Scopus team messed up very badly by omitting about one-third of our papers and most of our citations. I reported a month ago that Scopus had committed to fixing the issue within two weeks. Now almost FIVE WEEKS later they haven’t done a thing.

Here’s the problem:

In the column marked Documents 2020-23  you will see the number 67. In fact we published 99 articles between 2020 and 2023, not 67. This is easily established here. The number 67 relates to the period 2022-23 only. Accidentally or deliberately, Scopus has omitted a third of our papers from its database. But the error doesn’t end there. Papers published in OJAp between 2020 and 2023 have actually been cited 959 times, not 137. If you restrict the count to papers published in 2022-23 there are 526 citations. It’s no wonder that OJAp has such a low CiteScore, and consequently appears so far down the rankings, when the citation information is so woefully inaccurate.

“Metrics you can trust?” My arse!

If you want accurate bibliometric information about the papers published in the two years that Scopus has chosen to ignore you can look here.

This all merely demonstrates the folly that so many institutions place so much trust in Scopus. Unfortunately the powers that be have decided that Scopus listing is such a reliable indicator of quality that any article not published in a Scopus journal is worthless. Knowing that it has a monopoly, Scopus has no incentive to put any effort into its own quality assurance. It can peddle any error-ridden tripe to its subscribers, most of them paying for the product with taxpayers’ money. Unfortunately the bean-counters at Maynooth University are as credulous as any, mindlessly parroting spurious announcements based on the Scopus database.

Maynooth University is proud to offer undergraduates a course in Critical Skills. I suggest it that the gullible members of its management team would do well to take it.

9 Responses to “Failures of Scopus”

  1. Anton Garrett's avatar
    Anton Garrett Says:

    You need to send them a letter from a lawyer in their own country threatening to sue them for a large amount. That will get action, even if it is a bluff costing only a couple of hundred dollars.

  2. The failures of Scopus and its journal indexing highlight the need for improved quality control and transparency. Ensuring rigorous peer review processes is crucial for maintaining academic integrity and trust.

  3. The failures of Scopus and its journal indexing, including the challenges with Scopus journal search, highlight the need for improved quality control and transparency. Ensuring rigorous peer review processes is crucial for maintaining academic integrity and trust.

  4. The phenomenon is not new, see e.g. “The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus” (2016) (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1751157715301462), which strangely enough has been published by Elsevier. Writing via a lawyer might be a way to have them correct their mistakes. But I’d also look for a venue for protesting publicly in a like-minded community, in addition to the posts on this blog.

  5. […] being Hallowe’en, it seems an appropriate time to tell you a horror story. A few weeks ago I posted about the inaccuracy of the Scopus bibliographic database. I’ve contacted Scopus multiple times to supply them with correct data about the Open Journal […]

  6. This is not new, I have read some similar issue. It’s strange but this is the reality. Still got no solution to this issue. Hope they find this post soon so that they can fix the algorithm.

  7. […] elevates obscure or unrelated journals over established, high-quality ones (highlighted here and here). Further, in his article, Jonathan P. Tennant has exposed Web of Science and Scopus for their […]

  8. […] elevates obscure or unrelated journals over established, high-quality ones (highlighted here and here). Further, in his article, Jonathan P. Tennant has exposed Web of Science and Scopus for their […]

Leave a reply to Ariel Cancel reply