The Internationalization of Psychology Journals in Brazil: A Bibliometric Examination Based on Four Indices/ A Internacionalizacao dos Periodicos de Psicologia no Brasil: Uma Analise Bibliometrica Baseada em Quatro Indices/ La Internacionalizacion de las Revistas de Psicologia en Brasil: Un Examen Bibliometrico Basado en Cuatro Indices.
In 2015, a supplementary issue of Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica (Gomes & Fradkin, 2015a) focused almost exclusively on the internationalization of Brazil's psychology. Raising the quality of Brazil's output in this field and competing in the global market were frequent themes throughout that issue, as they are throughout most Latin American congresses as well. At that time, only one of Brazil's psychology journals (Psychology & Neuroscience) had a foothold in the international market, with a recently-formed partnership with the American Psychological Association (APA). Since then, Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica itself, has graduated to the "big leagues," now in partnership with the international publisher Springer (Remor, 2016). With two of Brazil's psychology journals now on the worldwide stage, we ask: What differentiates these journals from the rest?
To address this question, we begin with our conception of internationalization. As internationalization is a latent variable, we must measure it through observable variables, or proxies. As socioeconomic status is measured through income and/or education level (Williams & Collins, 1995); and depression, through attributional style (Hu, Zhang, & Yang, 2015); so internationalization must be measured--but through which variables? When we consult the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), the bibliographic database that hosts more than 1,200 Iberoamerican scientific journals, we find that scientific director, Rogerio Meneghini, provides specific recommendations for the internationalization of emerging-nation journals. Meneghini (2013) recommends: (1) the use of English language; (2) the inclusion of non-Brazilian internationals in the editorial process; and (3) the publishing of work by non-Brazilian authors. As Meneghini's name, along with that of SciELO's Abel Packer, is considered synonomous in many circles with the rising profile of Brazil's scientific journals, we will use his recommendations in this study. In addition, we will include: (4) study style. We now address these variables one-by-one.
As the scientific world communicates in English (Gibbs, 1995), use of English-language text is critical. While there is a place for local language (for addressing regionally-specific health risks, for example), publishing in English is essential (Meneghini & Packer, 2007; Vasconcelos, Sorenson, & Leta, 2007). For emerging nations like Brazil, this prospect can be daunting--the translation, the expense, the standards of the global market--but Brazilians must remember: To disseminate our science, we must publish in English. This is non-negotiable; English is the lingua franca. We now shift focus to the editorial board.
A journal's editorial board reflects its worldliness, its prestige, its vision, and its scope (Bedeian, Van Fleet, & Hyman, 2009). For emerging-nation journals, Meneghini (2013) recommends enrollment of international editors--those with name recognition and track records with successful, lingua-franca journals. He recommends periodic meetings between these parties and the national editorial board; and predicts their presence will attract higher-grade reviewers for submissions. And the higher-grade reviewers--lingua franca, naturally--will in turn attract higher-grade submissions. This leads us to our next point: the publishing of work by foreign authors.
The publishing of work by foreign authors distinguishes international from emerging-nation journals. Meneghini (2013) reports that less than 15% of the content from journals edited in England, Netherlands, and Switzerland originates from authors inside these countries' borders. By contrast, more than 70% of the content from the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) originates from authors inside these countries' borders (Meneghini, 2013). What this sets forth is the hallmark of international research: knowledge forged from the far reaches of the globe that has an entirety much larger than its parts. Part of this diversity in country of contribution evolves organically: as the contents of a journal reach a more-diverse and sophisticated audience--at that point, submissions widen, too. But in the meantime: global contributions lead to global readership. We now address the variable: study style.
Generally speaking, psychology journals spread their knowledge through empirical reports and descriptive/ summary reports. For the most part, international journals contain a higher percent of empirical reports, and domestic journals a higher percent of descriptive/summary reports (VandenBos & Winkler, 2015). As there is variability in study style among Brazilian journals, we will include this variable in our study. This addition brings our indices to four. As these indices, to date, have not been empirically examined, we will refer to them hereafter as presumed. Thus, our presumed indices of internationalization include the three (3) variables from Meneghini (2013), plus the variable study style.
The aim of this study, therefore, was to empirically examine the relationship between the presumed indices of internationalization and real-world internationalization, among the top journals in psychology in Brazil. Based on the weight of findings from past research, we hypothesized that, in relation to Brazilian psychology journals of lower internationalization, Brazilian psychology journals of higher internationalization would have a higher prevalence of: (a) English-language text; (b) editorial board members from native English-speaking countries; (c) lead authors affiliated with institutions in native English-speaking countries; and (d) empirical articles.
A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the top-ranked Brazilian psychology journals from the year 2015. This analysis assessed the relationship between the presumed indices of internationalization and the journals' status in terms of internationalization.
SCImago provides a ranking of scientific journals based on the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations came from. Of the 1,044 worldwide psychology journals listed in the 2014 SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR), 17 (1.6%) were included from Brazil. These journals comprised this study's sample. From the output of these journals for the year 2015 (759 articles), 672 research articles were included in the study. Excluded were: editorials, book reviews, interviews, corrections, letters, obituaries, and re-publications of historical works.
English-language text. English-language text refers to the language of the body of the article, independent of the title and the abstract. Inclusion of English-language text was recorded dichotomously (English/no-English) articleby-article within each issue of each journal for the year. Prevalence of English-language text was calculated separately for each journal in the study: [n articles.sub.ENGLISH] / [n articles.sub.TOTAL].
Editorial board makeup. Editorial board makeup articulates the percentage of each journal's editorial board that is affiliated with an institution based in a lingua-franca, i.e., English-speaking, country. These figures included editorial board personnel only, excluding titled editorial staff such as editors, associate editors, assistant editors, copy editors, layout people, and technical personnel. Prevalence of editorial board lingua franca was calculated separately for each journal in the study: [n editorial board.sub.LINGUA FRANCA] / [n editorial board.sub.TOTAL].
Lead author institution. Lead author institution differentiates between articles in which the lead author is affiliated with an institution in a lingua-franca, English-speaking, country, and articles in which the lead author is not affiliated with an institution in a lingua-franca country. Lead author institution was recorded dichotomously (lead author lingua franca/no lead author lingua franca) article-by-article within each issue of each journal for the year. Prevalence of lead author lingua franca was calculated separately for each journal in the Study: [n articles.sub.LEAD AUTHOR LINGUA FRANCA] / [n articles.sub.TOTAL].
Study style. Study style differentiates between articles based on empirical reports vs. articles based on descriptive/ summary reports. Inclusion criteria for empirical reports was that the article be data-driven and offer findings of statistical report. Study style was recorded dichotomously (empirical/non-empirical) article-by-article within each issue of each journal for the year. Prevalence of empirical articles was calculated separately for each journal in the study: [n articles.sub.EMPIRICAL] / [n articles.sub.TOTAL].
Publication house. Publication house articulates the publishing structure through which the journal disseminates its work. This information was gathered from each journal's web site and reported dichotomously (international publication house/no international publication house).
Data collection. Research articles (e.g., research reports, reviews, and theoretical articles) were included in the study. Non-research articles (e.g., editorials, book reviews, interviews, corrections, letters, obituaries, and re-publication of historical works) were excluded. From a starting pool of 759 articles, 87 non-research articles were excluded resulting in 672 research articles for the sample. Articles were coded for language, lead author institution, and study style. Articles were then scored dichotomously for text language (English or no-English), lead author institution (from lingua franca or non-lingua franca country), and study style (empirical or non-empirical). Information on each journal's publication house and editorial board makeup was gathered from the journal's web site. (Raw data for language and lead author institution available upon request.) As two of the journals were published through international publishing houses, we used the variable publication house (international or Brazilian) to differentiate journals of higher versus lower internationalization status.
Data analysis. Analyses were performed using SPSS version 16.0. First, frequencies of the dichotomous variables (English text, lead author institution, study style) were tallied and converted to percentages of each journal's total articles (e.g., English-language text = [n articles.sub.ENGLISH] / [n articles.sub.TOTAL]). Editorial board makeup was converted to percentage for each journal (Linguafranca editorial board = [n editorial board.sub.LINGUA FRANCA] / n [editorial board.sub.TOTAL]). The variable publication house was used as a proxy for successful internationalization, thereby defining the two groups for comparison: journals of higher internationalization (n = 2) and journals of lower internationalization (n = 15). Prior to hypothesis testing, the variables were examined for normality of distribution. The Shapiro-Wilk test revealed non-normality; therefore transformations were attempted. When transformations failed to normalize the data, a nonparametric approach was opted for. The Mann-Whitney U test was selected. The Mann-Whitney U test is used frequently when data are non-normally distributed (Bergmann, Ludbrook, & Spooren, 2000), and is effective when working with small samples (Acion, Peterson, Temple, & Arndt, 2006). To test Hypotheses 1-4, significant main effects for English text, editorial board makeup, lead author institution, and study style were separately examined with the Mann-Whitney U test set at p < .05 two-tailed. In addition, a t-test was conducted to ascertain differences in the SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) indicator, between international and Brazilian journals.
As shown in Table 1, all Brazilianjournals in our sample rank in the third, fourth, or fifth quintiles internationally, placing them below the international average. On the domestic front, eight of the seventeen journals are currently indexed by the SciELO database, attesting to their presence in the Latin American and Caribbean markets. It should be noted that of the nine journals not indexed by SciELO, two of them recently withdrew from SciELO upon partnership with international publishing houses (Psychology & Neuroscience and Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica). Also shown is the CAPES Qualis indicator, a rating administered by the Brazilian Ministry of Education, which assigns the majority of our journals (14/17) their highest or second highest rating (A1 or A2, respectively). As measured by the SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) indicator, Figure 1 reveals an impact differential of 26 to 1 between the top-five international psychology journals (M = 7.36, SD = 1.73) and the top-five Brazilian psychology journals in our sample (M = 0.28, SD = 0.05), t (4.007) = 9.11, p = .001, two-tailed.
Table 2 presents data for the four variables of interest. Hypothesis 1 predicted that there would be a higher prevalence of English-language text among the journals of higher internationalization than among the journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the prevalence of English-language text was not different between the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 66.5%) and the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 0.0%), U = 3.00, p = .058. In the absence of a significant main effect, Hypothesis 1 was not supported.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that there would be a higher prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-board members among the journals of higher internationalization than among the journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-board members was higher among the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 21.7%) than among the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 6.9%), U = 1.50, p = .041. In the presence of a significant main effect, Hypothesis 2 was supported.
Hypothesis 3 predicted that there would be a higher prevalence of articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca institutions among the journals of higher internationalization than among the journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the prevalence of articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca institutions was higher among the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 10.5%) than among the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 0.0%), U = 0.00, p = .003. In the presence of a significant main effect, Hypothesis 3 was supported.
Hypothesis 4 predicted that there would be a higher prevalence of empirical studies among the journals of higher internationalization than among the journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the prevalence of empirical studies was higher among the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 89.0%) than among the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 16.0%), U = 1.00, p = .036. In the presence of a significant main effect, Hypothesis 4 was supported.
This study is the first we are aware of that empirically examined the relationship between commonly accepted variables of internationalization and internationalization itself, among psychology journals in Brazil. Inconsistent with Hypothesis 1, as well as recent research (Packer, 2016; VandenBos & Winkler, 2015), is the finding that English-language text is not more prevalent among journals of higher internationalization. Consistent with Hypothesis 2 is the finding of a higher prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-board members among journals of higher internationalization. Consistent with Hypothesis 3 is the finding of a higher prevalence of lead authors based at institutions in lingua-franca countries, among journals of higher internationalization. And consistent with Hypothesis 4 is the finding of a higher prevalence of empirical articles among journals of higher internationalization. To some it may appear that the key to internationalizing these journals lies in removing Brazilian input from the journals. We would counter that point though. To do so, we now look at the findings.
With regard to English-language text, emerging nation journals that publish articles in English have the potential to reach the global market. Those journals not publishing in English will never reach the global market, i.e., the science that they publish will be lost. This notion of lost science (Gibbs, 1995) drives Brazil and other emerging nations to increasingly publish articles in English. This trend can be seen in the SciELO database, in which publication of English-language articles has risen from 48% to 62%, from 2011 to 2015 (Packer, 2016). SciELO's goal for the year 2019 is an English-language publication rate of 75% (Packer, 2016). And finally, based on data from the Web of Science (WoS), Gamba et al. (2015) remind us that the 2012/2013 citations for English-language articles were approximately twice those for Portuguese articles (0.72 and 0.36, respectively), published in Brazilian journals of psychology. This last finding highlights the importance of English-language publication in disseminating the science from Brazil.
But just because a journal publishes articles in English, that of itself is not assurance of strong science. In fact, a recent study (Fradkin, 2015) on the translational integrity of summary materials in Brazilian psychology journals found substantial variability in the integrity of such materials. The study also found a significant relationship (r = 0.62, p < .001) between the translational integrity of the journal and the overall impression the journal made with native English-language scholars (Fradkin, 2015). This suggests that the simple presence of articles in English is not a guarantee of scientific rigor. This same caveat applies to internationalization: While English is required to reach the lingua-franca market; by itself, it is not sufficient for the task. Thus, what Finding 1 suggests is that Brazil's commitment must go farther, in terms of the quality and readability of its English.
Finding 2, which found a higher prevalence of lingua-franca editorial board members among journals of higher internationalization, is consistent with Meneghini's (2013) recommendations. As is Finding 3, which found a higher prevalence of articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca institutions among those journals of higher internationalization. These findings, however, might court controversy. To some, these findings may suggest that the key to the internationalization of scientific journals in Brazil lies in removing Brazilian input from the journals. That is not the case, however. Rather, the key to internationalizing Brazil's journals entails supplementing Brazilian input with lingua-franca expertise. Expertise, in terms of seasoned editors, reviewers, publishers, and authors. Professionals are needed from the lingua-franca world to raise the standards of the journals in Brazil. Assistance is required in: peer-review, editorial decisions, structured abstracts, lingua-franca level English, along with content focus for a global audience. These areas, and more, are summed up by VandenBos and Winkler (2015), in their comparison of differences between regional and international journals. Of the four variables examined, having articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca institutions is statistically the strongest (U = 0.00, p = .003) of the group, in its relationship with successful internationalization. Hopefully, this finding will encourage Brazilian journals to be more proactive in promoting international collaboration. If for no other reason, the process of collaborating with scholars who speak fluent lingua franca can do nothing but enhance Brazilian lingua-franca language skills.
The significance of Finding 4, which found a higher prevalence of empirical studies among journals of higher internationalization, should provide motivation for non-data-driven scholars to shift their focus, when they can, to design studies methodologically more suited for the global market. While there will always be journals that will publish descriptive/summary reviews, there are many more that will publish data-driven/empirical reports, especially in the lingua-franca market.
In the realm of peer-review, an alternate proxy to consider would be the proportion of international reviewers screening papers at the journal. would be the proportion of international reviewers screening papers at the journal. At present, this information is not regularly disclosed; however, a template can be viewed in an end-of-year assessment for the journal Psychology & Neuroscience (Mograbi, 2014). As this variable could be predictive of journal internationalization status and quality of content, we recommend it be examined in the future. And if the variable shows promise, we would further recommend that it be mandated for disclosure for all Brazilian scientific journals; and serve as a criterion for the CAPES Qualis journal ranking. Such policy revision could be promoted by Associacao Nacional de Pesquisa e Pos-graduacao em Psicologia (ANPEPP)--an organization committed to the betterment of graduate programs in psychology; and one that has a history of facilitating change.
This study, using a sample of the top-ranked Brazilian psychology journals, aimed to empirically examine the relationship between four commonly-presumed indices of internationalization and the journals' status in terms of internationalization. Although much has been written about the internationalization of Brazil's higher-education programs (Bastos, Tomanari, Trindade, & Andery, 2015; Bianco, Hutz, & Yamamoto, 2015; Menandro et al., 2015) and scientific journals (Gomes & Fradkin, 2015b; Hanes, 2014; Meneghini & Packer, 2007; Packer, 2016), this is the first study we are aware of that has empirically examined these relationships, within a bibliometric format.
Nonetheless, this study may provoke debate about internationalization, as a concept; as a term. In a study such as ours, internationalization refers to a second-tiered science rising to a top-tiered status. Hypothetically, that success might be inferred when the top-five Brazilianjournals in our field rank in the 1st (top) quintile internationally. However, other scholars might contend that internationalization is achieved when journals publish for a truly global audience, in an assortment of publication languages. Among the journals in our sample, this criterion is met most closely by Revista Latino-americana de Psicopatologia Fundamental, a Brazilian publication that publishes summary materials (titles and abstracts) in Portuguese, Spanish, English, French, German, and Chinese, and texts in an assortment of Portuguese, Spanish, English, and French. This publication, however, has an impact factor of 0.06 (SCImago), which reflects weak dissemination of its findings, in relation to the other journals in our sample (Table 1). Thus, we see that there are two divergent models (lingua-franca vs. multicultural) that use the term internationalization for very different meanings. Moving onward from semantics, we will now discuss the study's limitations.
One limitation of this study was discussed earlier: the non-normality of the data, which precluded parametric analyses. Another limitation was the small size of the groups that we compared (n higher internationalization = 2; n lower internationalization = 15). In response to these limitations, we employed the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test (Bergmann et al., 2000). We wish to report, however, that the Mann-Whitney findings were consistent with Pearson Product-Moment correlations, which we ran parallel to the analyses reported here.
Another limitation--or challenge, if you will--was the operationalization of study styles. While we used empirical and non-empirical to distinguish the two styles, some may take issue with our terminology. While we acknowledge that we could have been more specific in our choice (e.g., data-driven and non-data-driven), we chose empirical because the term is used more commonly in science. With regard to these descriptives, future studies might consider slightly different operationalizations of this variable when designing their methodologies.
A further limitation concerns directionality. We should ask ourselves, for example, with regard to Finding 4: "Does higher internationalization lead to greater publication of empirical papers?" or "Do journals publishing a higher proportion of empirical papers offer a more attractive business model to international publishing houses?" The reader must be wary; they must be circumspect; they must move slowly in assumptions of causality.
A final limitation worth mentioning would be the generalizability of our findings. As this study was specific to Brazilian journals of psychology, its findings best apply within that purview. While aspects of our methods could certainly be used in further studies on the internationalization of emerging-nation journals--of different nations, different disciplines, for example--we by no means present these findings as a template, ready-made, to solve the challenges of emerging-nation journals. We present these data and these findings as they pertain to psychology journals in Brazil--at this point in Brazil's history and her growth. And methodologically: as this study is cross-sectional in nature, causality cannot be inferred. And, finally, as this study is a snapshot of one year's worth of issues, we should refrain from projecting outcomes for the future.
Nonetheless, there are implications in this study; and bits of our report propel us forward. If for nothing else, this study offers an empirical evaluation of Meneghini (2013) and SciELO's (Packer, 2016) ideas on internationalization, as they pertain to emerging-nation journals. In this aspect, the study confirms several of their ideas (lingua-franca editorial board; lead author lingua-franca institution) as extremely viable; and concludes that one (English-language text) must be refined and more thought out. So, as to the presumed nature of these indices of internationalization, we are happy to report that they are viable foundations we can build from. And building from foundation is what scientific research is. As to the implementation of these variables tied to internationalization, we must be cautious in our assumptions of direction. We must remember that modifying editorial-board makeup to majority lingua-franca membership will not, in and of itself, bring a Springer or a Wiley to the table. And more importantly: that modified editorial-board makeup, in and of itself, will not magically increase our quality of science. We might be more astute in seeing that a higher quality of science would be more likely to attract seasoned lingua-franca scholars--to serve advisorships on editorial boards. And the same sensibility might increase submissions from lead authors from lingua-franca institutions. And in this cycle, our journals spread their wings; and what was once earth-bound, now will fly. As the young bird leaves its nest, so our science finds its wings; and through this process, science is evolving.
This is not to say that Brazilian journals should not strive to internationalize; they should. In fact, these variables we examined could serve as starting points. Starting points to spread the knowledge that the journal is professing; to upgrade its quality and worldliness; and to diversify its science through global authorship--these starting points can serve as a beginning. The good news is that, to many lingua-franca scholars, Brazilian science is very much an unknown factor. Thus, through the internationalization of her science, Brazil can make a clean and fresh impression to a world of scholars in the waiting.
Acion, L., Peterson, J. J., Temple, S., & Arndt, S. (2006). Probabilistic index: An intuitive non-parametric approach to measuring the size of treatment effects. Statistics in Medicine, 25(4), 591-602. doi:10.1002/sim.2256
Bastos, A. V. B., Tomanari, G. Y., Trindade, Z. A., & Andery, M. A. P. A. (2015). The psychology postgraduate system in Brazil: Current characteristics and challenges for the area. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 23-33. doi:10.1590/16787153.2015284005
Bedeian, A. G., Van Fleet, D. D., & Hyman, H. H. (2009). Scientific achievement and editorial board membership. Organizational Research Methods, 12(2), 211-238. doi:10.1177/1094428107309312
Bergmann, R., Ludbrook, J., & Spooren, W. P. J. M. (2000). Different outcomes of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test from different statistics packages. The American Statistician, 54(1), 72-77. doi: 10.1080/00031305.2000.1 0474513
Bianco, A. C. L., Hutz, C. S., & Yamamoto, M. E. (2015). Internationalization: Towards new horizons. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 49-56. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.2015284008
Fradkin, C. (2015). A summary evaluation of the top-five Brazilian psychology journals by native English-language scholars. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 99-111. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840014
Gamba, E. C., Packer, A. L., & Meneghini, R. (2015). Pathways to internationalize Brazilian journals of psychology. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 66-71. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840010
Gibbs, W. W. (1995). Lost science in the Third World. Scientific American, 273(2), 92-99. doi: 10.1038/ scientificamerican0895-92
Gomes, W. B., & Fradkin, C. (2015a). Editorial. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 1. doi: 10.1590/1678-7153.2015284001
Gomes, W. B., & Fradkin, C. (2015b). Historical notes on psychology in Brazil: The creation, growth and sustenance of postgraduate education. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 2-13. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.2015284002
Hanes, W. F. (2014). Nominal groups as an indicator of non-native English communication problems in top-ranked Brazilian science journals. Belas Infieis, 2(2), 127-139. Retrieved from http://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/ belasinfieis/article/view/10625/7691
Hu, T., Zhang, D., & Yang, Z. (2015). The relationship between attributional style for negative outcomes and depression: A meta-analysis. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 34(4), 304-321. doi:10.1521/jscp.2015.34.4.304
Menandro, P. R. M., Linhares, M. B. M., Bastos, A., & Dell'Aglio, D. D. (2015). The Brazilian psychology postgraduate system and the internationalization process: Critical aspects, evaluation indicators and challenges for consolidation. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 57-65. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.2015284009
Meneghini, R. (2013). Scielo, Scientific Electronic Library Online, a database of open access journals. Higher Learning Research Communications, 3(3), 3-7. doi:10.18870/hlrc.v3i3.153
Meneghini, R., & Packer, A. L. (2007). Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication. EMBO Reports, 8(2), 112-116. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400906
Mograbi, D. C. (2014). Psychology & Neuroscience indicators in 2013: Evidence of growth and internationalization.
Psychology & Neuroscience, 7(2), 61-63. doi:10.3922/j. psns.2014.022
Packer, A. L. (2016). The adoption of English among SciELO Brazil journals has been increasing. SciELO in Perspective. Retrieved from http://blog.scielo.org/en/2016/05/10/ the-adoption-of-english-among-scielo-brazil-journals-has-been-increasing/
Remor, E. (2016). A new era for the journal Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 29(1), 1-3. doi:10.1186/s41155-016-0011-2
VandenBos, G. R., & Winkler, J. M. (2015). An analysis of the status of journals and research in psychology from Latin America. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 28(Suppl. 1), 82-93. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840012
Vasconcelos, S. M. R., Sorenson, M. M., & Leta, J. (2007). Scientist-friendly policies for non-native English-speaking authors: Timely and welcome. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 40(6), 743-747. doi:10.1590/S0100879X2007000600001
Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (1995). US socioeconomic and racial differences in health: Patterns and explanations. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 349-386. doi:10.1146/ annurev.so.21.080195.002025
Chris Fradkin is a Lecturer/Researcher at the University of California.
Received: June 23, 2016
1st Revision: Aug. 06, 2016
Approved: Aug. 11, 2016
Chris Fradkin (2)
University of California, Merced, USA
(1) Correspondence address:
Chris Fradkin. University of California, Merced, Psychological Sciences, 5200 N. Lake Road, Merced, CA 95343, United States of America. E-mail: email@example.com
(2) Grateful acknowledgement is expressed to research assistant Jailene Gutierrez.
Caption: Figure 1. SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) of highest-ranking international (left) and Brazilian (right) psychology journals. SJR, SCImago Journal Rank Indicator; Ann Rev of Psych, Annual Review of Psychology; Pers on Psych Science, Perspectives on Psychological Science; Journ of Applied Psych, Journal of Applied Psychology; Psi e Sociedade, Psicologia e Sociedade; Paideia, Paideia (Ribeirao Preto); Psi: Teoria e Pesquisa, Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa (Brasilia); Psych & Neurosci, Psychology & Neuroscience; Psi: Reflexao e Critica, Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica.
Table 1 Descriptive Statistics of the Top Brazilian Psychology Journals Rank Rank Quintile Journal Worldwide (N) Brazil World World (1,044) 1 611 3rd Psicologia e Sociedade 2 676 4th Paideia 3 725 4th Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 4 736 4th Psychology & Neuroscience 5 748 4th Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica 6 787 4th Revista Latinoamericana de Psicopatologia Fundamental 7 799 4th Revista Brasileira de Orientacao Profissional 8 800 4th Psicologia Escolar e Educacional 9 894 5th Psicologia Clinica 10 927 5th Psicologia USP 11 943 5th Estudos de Psicologia (Natal) 12 945 5th Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia 13 953 5th Psicologia em Estudo 14 961 5th Agora: Estudos em Teoria Psicanalitica 15 1,012 5th Revista Brasileira de Neurologia e Psiquiatria 16 1,034 5th Revista da Abordagem Gestaltica 17 1,038 5th Tempo Psicanalitico Rank Est. SJR Impact SciELO Qualis Publication Brazil Rating Factor Inclusion Rating House (a) 1 1986 0.36 0.16 Yes A2 Brazil 2 1991 0.30 0.30 Yes A1 Brazil 3 1985 0.26 0.23 Yes A1 Brazil 4 2008 0.25 0.58 No (b) A2 Int'l 5 1988 0.24 0.27 No (c) A1 Int'l 6 1998 0.22 0.06 Yes A2 Brazil 7 2000 0.21 0.11 No A2 Brazil 8 1996 0.21 0.18 Yes A2 Brazil 9 1989 0.15 0.08 No (d) A2 Brazil 10 1990 0.13 0.14 Yes A2 Brazil 11 1996 0.13 0.12 Yes A1 Brazil 12 1949 0.13 0.05 No A2 Brazil 13 1996 0.12 0.06 No (e) A1 Brazil 14 1998 0.12 0.04 A2 Brazil 15 1997 0.10 0.00 No B4 (f) Brazil 16 1995 0.10 0.02 No B1 Brazil 17 1978 0.10 0.00 No B1 Brazil Note. Most recent rankings by SCImago (for the year 2014); SJR Rating, SCImago Journal Rank indicator; Est., established; Impact Factor, 2014 citations of articles published 2012-13; Int'l, international. (a) Qualis 2014 Psicologia rating (except when noted). (b) Indexed in SciELO 2008-2014; withdrawn from SciELO upon partnership with APA in 2015. (c) Indexed in SciELO 1999-2015; withdrawn from SciELO upon partnership with Springer in 2016. (d) Indexed in SciELO 2005-2015; indexing interrupted Sept., 2015. (e) Indexed in SciELO 2000-2014; indexing interrupted Sept., 2015. (f) Qualis 2014 Medicina I rating. Table 2 Top Brazilian Psychology Journals: 2015 Journal Total Docs. English EB Lingua Text (%) Franca (%) Psicologia e Sociedade 63 0.0 6.5 Paideia 39 100.0 10.5 Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 59 0.0 13.0 Psychology & Neuroscience 41 100.0 30.0 Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica 103 33.0 13.3 Revista Latinoamericana 39 7.7 25.0 de Psicopatologia Fundamental Revista Brasileira de 19 5.3 13.3 Orientacao Profissional Psicologia Escolar e 59 0.0 0.0 Educacional Psicologia Clinica 25 0.0 0.0 Psicologia USP 51 5.9 8.7 Estudos de Psicologia 23 4.3 0.0 (Natal) Arquivos Brasileiros 31 0.0 12.5 de Psicologia Psicologia em Estudo 44 100.0 5.0 Agora: Estudos em Teoria 18 0.0 6.9 Psicanalitica Revista Brasileira de 16 0.0 0.0 Neurologia e Psiquiatria Revista da Abordagem 18 5.6 8.3 Gestaltica Tempo Psicanalitico 24 0.0 0.0 Journal LA Lingua Empirical (%) Studies (%) Psicologia e Sociedade 0.0 6.3 Paideia 2.6 89.7 Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 0.0 55.9 Psychology & Neuroscience 17.1 87.8 Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica 3.9 90.3 Revista Latinoamericana 2.6 0.0 de Psicopatologia Fundamental Revista Brasileira de 0.0 52.6 Orientacao Profissional Psicologia Escolar e 0.0 37.3 Educacional Psicologia Clinica 0.0 16.0 Psicologia USP 0.0 11.8 Estudos de Psicologia 0.0 39.1 (Natal) Arquivos Brasileiros 0.0 38.7 de Psicologia Psicologia em Estudo 0.0 6.8 Agora: Estudos em Teoria 0.0 0.0 Psicanalitica Revista Brasileira de 0.0 50.0 Neurologia e Psiquiatria Revista da Abordagem 0.0 0.0 Gestaltica Tempo Psicanalitico 0.0 0.0 Note. EB Lingua Franca (%), % editorial board members affiliated with an institution in a lingua franca/English-speaking country; LA Lingua Franca (%), % articles in which lead author is affiliated with an institution in a lingua franca/English-speaking country.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Paideia (Ribeirao Preto)|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2017|
|Previous Article:||Paideia: Management Report--2016.|
|Next Article:||Validity of the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test in a Brazilian Sample/Validade do Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test em uma Amostra...|