issue 4

Inside Scopus - news for librarians

Letter from the Editor | Scopus Director Jaco Zijlstra looks back at 2006 and ahead to 2007 | As a matter of fact | Scopus RSS feeds lead to increased usage
Content - our most important aspect | Confessions of a user | This just in | Conference connection

Profiling the Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board

Julie Arnheim of Princeton University talks about content and the recent Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board meeting

Content is the most important asset and serves as the foundation of Scopus. A 32-member international Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB), comprised of external and independent experts from all fields of science, critically assesses and selects information sources for inclusion. This process is of crucial importance for quality assurance.

Candidate titles are compiled from user recommendations, CSAB members themselves, and from other publishers via http://info.scopus.com/suggesttitle

The CSAB then decides on the inclusion of newly proposed titles in Scopus by applying the following guidelines:

  1. A title must have an English-language title and publish English-language abstracts of all research articles. However, full-text articles can be in any language.
  2. Timely publication of issues, with a minimum of one issue per year, is required.
  3. Overall quality must be high. Assessment of a journal’s quality may include, but is not limited to, the following:
    • Authority: including the reputation of a commercial or society publisher, the affiliation of authors and the existence of an editorial board.
    • Popularity & Availability: including the number of references the title has received in Scopus; the number of institutions that have subscribed to the title; and the number of times the title has been requested for inclusion. A title must demonstrate some form of quality control (e.g. peer review).

Julie Arnheim, Chemistry Librarian at Princeton University, is a member of the CSAB and recently participated at the group’s semiannual conference, where more than 1,000 journals were under evaluation. Julie explains, “The level of recognition that Scopus has achieved in the relatively short time since its launch has led to an explosion of titles being submitted for inclusion. Evaluating this number of titles is a daunting task and so we’re actively exploring ways to streamline the process while guaranteeing that we maintain the high standards for quality across the entire range of scientific, technical, medical and social science disciplines.”

Julie notes that the ability of Scopus to grow organically as new sources appear is particularly important. “It reflects how scientific information grows with time and how databases must evolve. Elsevier is also looking into the acquisition of large chunks of data, whole complements of journals in specific fields.”

“We’re looking for quality on a global scale,” Julie continues, “more than half of the titles currently under consideration are published outside of the United States and Western Europe. It is therefore imperative that the committee evaluates the suggested titles within their field of expertise. Members of the board evaluate the quality of the journals by, for example, checking the editors’ career histories and publications; reading a selection of articles within the journal; and acquiring information on the title's peer-review process.”

Overseeing Scopus content is the group’s main priority, but their role doesn’t stop there. Julie reports that one of the highlights of the CSAB meeting was the sessions devoted to research workflow tools. “We’ve always understood that one of Scopus’ primary objectives is to support the research process with tools that can integrate seamlessly into users’ workflow. It was interesting – and enjoyable – to brainstorm with such a stimulating group of colleagues from around the world and share some of their experiences. We all work with researchers every day, but it was an extremely useful exercise to look at what they do and how they do it ‘under the microscope’ in order to really gain a better understanding of their information needs.”

“The results were certainly interesting and thought-provoking,” Julie concludes. “I wouldn't be surprised to find some of our ideas on the drawing board for a future Scopus release.”

For more from Julie Arnheim about Scopus content and the activities of the CSAB go to http://info.scopus.com/detail/what/julie_arnheim.asp The Content Selection and Advisory Board in Lisbon, Portugal, October 2006