How to Get Indexed in Scopus and Web of Science: A Guide for Editors

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Understanding Scopus and Web of Science
• Editorial Policies and Ethical Standards
• Peer Review Process and Editorial Rigor
• Article Quality and Citation Potential
• Editorial Board Composition and Diversity
• Technical Infrastructure and Journal Visibility
• Application Process and Evaluation Criteria
• Responding to Rejections and Improving
• Conclusion

Introduction

Indexation in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) is a hallmark of quality and credibility in scholarly publishing. For journal editors, especially those in emerging or niche disciplines, getting a journal into these prestigious databases is not merely a badge of honor—it can profoundly affect author submissions, citation metrics, funding opportunities, and the overall academic reputation of the publishing institution. However, the path to indexation is not straightforward. It requires strategic planning, editorial rigor, and long-term commitment to scholarly best practices.

This guide is designed specifically for journal editors seeking to elevate their publication’s visibility and impact through Scopus and Web of Science. It demystifies the evaluation criteria, outlines practical steps for preparing a strong application, and offers candid advice on navigating the review process. While each database has distinct expectations, both emphasize quality, consistency, and international relevance. Understanding these underlying principles will help editors position their journals effectively.

Achieving indexation is not about checking boxes—it is about cultivating a journal that consistently contributes to scholarly dialogue, attracts diverse voices, and upholds the highest standards of editorial integrity. This guide aims to be both strategic and actionable, bridging policy and practice so editors can make informed, confident decisions. Let’s begin by exploring what Scopus and Web of Science look for when evaluating journals.

Understanding Scopus and Web of Science

Scopus and Web of Science are two of the world’s most prominent abstracting and indexing platforms. Researchers, universities, and funding bodies use both to track academic performance, analyze trends, and assess research impact.

Scopus, developed by Elsevier, covers various disciplines, including sciences, technology, medicine, social sciences, and the arts and humanities. It boasts over 27,000 active titles and is known for its rapid indexing process. Scopus also powers many university rankings and research analytics tools, making it especially attractive to institutions.

Web of Science, maintained by Clarivate, is the more selective of the two. It includes several indices, with the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) being the most prestigious. The Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) is often considered a precursor to inclusion in the flagship indexes and offers a valuable first step for newer journals.

Although both platforms serve similar functions, their selection processes and criteria differ slightly. Editors must understand these differences to tailor their strategies accordingly. Neither platform guarantees indexation and requires evidence of sustained quality and global relevance.

Editorial Policies and Ethical Standards

A strong editorial foundation is the first pillar of indexation readiness. Scopus and Web of Science carefully assess a journal’s editorial policies, looking for transparency, consistency, and ethical integrity.

The journal must clearly articulate its aims and scope on the website, along with submission guidelines and peer review policies. Editorial independence must be evident—an editor-in-chief who is actively publishing in the journal can raise red flags. Likewise, editorial boards should be composed of qualified scholars with verifiable affiliations and academic credentials.

Ethical publishing practices are not negotiable. Journals must adhere to international standards, such as those outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These include policies on plagiarism, conflict of interest, data sharing, and corrections or retractions. If your journal claims to follow COPE guidelines, be sure actually to implement them.

A clear policy on author fees or waivers is also crucial. Transparency fosters trust and demonstrates adherence to ethical best practices. Editors should periodically review these policies to reflect current realities and comply with evolving expectations.

Peer Review Process and Editorial Rigor

Peer review quality can make or break a journal’s indexation prospects. Scopus and Web of Science look for journals that demonstrate rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review processes.

Double-blind or single-blind peer review is both acceptable, but the process must be clearly explained on the journal website. Review timelines, criteria, and editors’ roles in the decision-making process should also be documented. This builds confidence in the journal’s commitment to academic integrity.

Reviewers must be appropriately qualified and diverse in terms of geographic and institutional background. A common pitfall for regional journals is over-reliance on local reviewers. A more international and multidisciplinary reviewer base reflects broader reach and editorial maturity.

Make sure that every article published in the journal is peer-reviewed. Exceptions—such as editorials or book reviews—should be clearly marked and limited. In case evaluators request additional information, it’s also worth documenting peer review histories (e.g., with timestamps or reviewer reports) internally.

Article Quality and Citation Potential

At the heart of any indexation decision lies the perceived scholarly value of the journal’s content. Scopus and Web of Science assess the originality, relevance, and citation potential of published articles. This is not a volume game; quality always trumps quantity.

Journals should focus on publishing articles that offer clear contributions to the field. Research articles should be well-structured, properly cited, and grounded in current literature. Methodologies should be sound, and conclusions defensible. Editors should avoid publishing articles that are overly descriptive, repetitive, or lacking in critical analysis.

Language quality also matters. Although not all journals need to be in English, articles must have English abstracts and keywords. Translation support can be a valuable investment for journals in non-English languages, especially when targeting an international readership.

Citations are another indicator of impact. While it may take time for a journal to accumulate citations, consistent citation patterns are viewed favorably, even at a modest scale. Encouraging authors to cite relevant work from your journal organically (not coercively) can support citation growth.

Editorial Board Composition and Diversity

An engaged and internationally diverse editorial board lends credibility to your journal. It reflects your ability to attract qualified experts who support the journal’s mission and contribute to its growth.

Scopus and Web of Science scrutinize editorial boards for academic legitimacy and geographical spread. At least half of the board should be from outside the journal’s home country, and members should have active research profiles. Avoid listing inactive or honorary board members without a defined role. Their presence may be interpreted as cosmetic rather than substantive.

Editorial boards should be dynamic, not static. Periodic rotation of members, addition of new scholars, and removal of inactive ones signal a commitment to renewal and growth. Board meetings, if held, should include discussions on improving journal quality and scope. Documenting such engagements can be helpful if ever requested during evaluation.

Also, be wary of inflated editorial rosters. Having 10 active, engaged board members is better than 40 passive ones. Transparency in roles, expectations, and contribution tracking can help maintain an effective board structure.

Technical Infrastructure and Journal Visibility

The backend of your journal—its website, metadata, archiving, and indexing in other databases—can significantly influence indexation success. A poorly managed site or a lack of technical consistency will raise red flags.

Your journal website should be user-friendly, mobile-responsive, and compliant with basic web standards. All issues and articles should be freely accessible and accompanied by metadata such as DOI, publication date, author affiliations, ORCID IDs, and keywords. The more structured your metadata, the easier it is for indexing systems to harvest and understand your content.

Implementing digital preservation practices is also essential. Services like LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, or Portico ensure the long-term availability of published content. Web of Science, in particular, values such commitments to archival stability.

Moreover, indexing in reputable subject-specific or regional databases (such as DOAJ, EBSCO, or ASEAN Citation Index) before applying to Scopus or WoS can demonstrate your journal’s growing reputation. Visibility on platforms like Google Scholar and Crossref further boosts discoverability and readership.

Application Process and Evaluation Criteria

You can initiate the application process once you feel your journal meets the necessary standards. Both Scopus and Web of Science provide submission portals where you can propose your journal for inclusion. Be prepared for a thorough, sometimes lengthy review.

Scopus uses a Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB), comprising subject experts who review submissions against a set of transparent criteria. These include journal policy, content, quality of peer review, and citation analysis. You can track your application status through their system, but decisions often take several months.

Web of Science, through Clarivate’s Editorial Integrity team, has a similarly rigorous process. The journal is first evaluated for the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). If successful, it may later be upgraded to the flagship indexes. Clarivate looks at various criteria encompassing editorial quality, international diversity, and citation impact.

In both cases, incomplete or misleading information can derail your application. Be honest about your journal’s history, ownership, and operations. Upload supporting documents (e.g., sample issues, peer review policies) and be prepared to respond to follow-up queries.

Responding to Rejections and Improving

Rejection from Scopus or Web of Science is not the end of the road. It’s part of the journey. Most journals are not accepted on their first try, especially if they’re newly established or operate in emerging fields.

Use the feedback provided (if any) as a blueprint for improvement. It might point to weaknesses in peer review, editorial structure, or content quality. Take these criticisms seriously and address them systematically. Avoid reapplying too quickly; build a concrete action plan and track progress over 18 to 36 months before trying again.

Also, consider consulting with peers or indexing experts who have guided other journals through the process. Joining publisher networks or attending editorial workshops can offer practical insights and help you avoid common mistakes.

Indexation is a long game. With consistent editorial discipline and strategic refinement, your journal can grow in both visibility and credibility, even before formal inclusion in Scopus or Web of Science.

Conclusion

Getting a journal indexed in Scopus or Web of Science requires editorial commitment, operational transparency, scholarly rigor, and international engagement. For editors, the process is as much about improving the journal as it is about getting recognition. The best way to position your journal for indexation is to treat it not just as a platform for publication, but as a living scholarly community with high standards and global aspirations.

This guide has outlined the foundational aspects—editorial policies, peer review, content quality, board composition, technical infrastructure, and the application process—that influence indexation success. By focusing on these elements with intent and consistency, editors can build a journal that not only meets the criteria of Scopus and Web of Science but also earns the trust and respect of the scholarly community it serves.

Even if indexation does not come immediately, the process of striving toward it can elevate your journal’s quality, visibility, and value. And that, in itself, is a worthy achievement.