Editorial & Corrections Policy

Researchers make real decisions based on what we publish. These are the standards we hold ourselves to, and the process for fixing anything we get wrong.

Sourcing & independence

• Every metric is drawn from named upstream sources — see our Data Methodology. We do not invent or estimate numbers; where a value is unverified we show "Not available".
• Rankings, quartiles, and recommendations are derived only from those metrics. We do not accept payment from publishers for ranking position, badges, or favourable placement.
• We are independent of all publishers and of the metric providers (Clarivate, Elsevier, SCImago).

Use of AI assistance

Some long-form guides are drafted with the help of AI writing tools. Every such article is reviewed and edited by a named human author before publication, and all figures are checked against the sources above. We do not auto-publish unedited AI text, and per-journal pages are generated from structured data, not from a language model.

How to report an error

1. Open the contact form and choose “Data correction”.
2. Include the journal name or ISSN and the exact value you believe is wrong (with a source if you have one).
3. We acknowledge correction reports within 2 business days and, where the upstream data supports the fix, update the record at the next refresh. If a value cannot be verified, we remove it rather than display a doubtful figure.

Corrections log

Material corrections to methodology or to widely-viewed pages are noted with a date on the relevant page. The "Last updated" stamp on our Methodology page reflects the most recent change to how we source and label data.