Scopus content policy and selection changes
For your research to be the best that it can be, you need access to the most up-to-date and highest-quality interdisciplinary content out there. This is why Scopus has a clearly stated selection policy and an internationally acclaimed board of selection experts, so you can be sure that what you see on Scopus meets your high standards. Click here to visit the Scopus Content and Selection page for details on our selection process and policies.
As the largest indexer of global research content, Scopus includes titles from more than 7,000 publishers worldwide. These journals, books and conference papers are visible to millions of Scopus users, who in turn read your content and then cite it in papers, in grant applications and reports, and in patent applications. To ensure that Scopus serves the broadest information needs of researchers, our Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) continuously reviews suggestions and publishing programs to expand our content listings. Click here to learn about the CSAB and meet the members.
Changes to the Scopus content policy
Occasionally changes in academic research publishing and technology require changes to our content policy. Elsevier is committed to ensuring the accuracy and quality of our content, so these changes have been created based on thorough study and analysis by team members.
The following changes are now active and will be used in the Scopus content selection process moving forward:
- Removing "2 year" conditions for newly launched journals
One of Scopus journal selection criteria is publication history. We used to make this conditional for most publishers that their newly launched journals can only submit for Scopus review by the CSAB after 2 years of publication. Since August 2024, this conditional criteria is removed. We now advise the publisher of the title to carefully determine what the right moment is to submit the title for Scopus in terms of how much content has been published. Please note that the CSAB still requires some publication history and a number of publications for review and in case of a negative evaluation outcome, there will be an embargo period that the journal cannot apply. With this change, we adopt full transparency and all publishers will be treated equally with the benefit that more recent titles may end up in Scopus faster.
- Encouraging journals to integrate Generative AI policies
Generative AI (GenAI) presents both opportunities and challenges in scientific writing and academic publishing. To improve transparency, Scopus encourages journals to have a dedicated GenAI policy and disclose the use of GenAI in creating content or anywhere else in the peer review and publishing process. We are aware that GenAI is developing rapidly, and Scopus does not demand specific requirements or wording that needs to be covered in such a policy. However, note that major publishers and associations already publish policies or declarations on the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing on their websites, such as:
- The use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing (Click here for an example - Elsevier)
- WAME Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications (Click here and example - WAME)
- Enhanced scrutiny for journal changes
To maintain our high-quality standards, at Scopus, we ensure that changes to the source (journal) are carefully monitored and validated. The authenticity of source changes are verified before any updates are made. Source changes can include, but are not limited to, changes to the title name, ISSN, ownership, or Editorial oversight of the journal. It is therefore not guaranteed that a journal will remain selected for Scopus coverage after the change, and this is subject to continued discretional review by the Scopus Content Selection & Advisory board (CSAB). Journals that have undergone significant change will be considered a new journal and may be submitted for Scopus review again according to the regular title review process.
To come to a decision to accept or reject a title for Scopus, Elsevier follows the independent advice from the CSAB. However, Elsevier in consultation with the CSAB reserves the right to change decisions, adjust the selection criteria, halt, remove, or re-evaluate titles that are accepted for Scopus without prior notice.