20 years of Scopus: How research oversight is evolving to confront new challenges

As we celebrate our 20th anniversary this year, we have been reflecting on the evolution of Scopus and the profound changes to the research landscape during this time.

With 99 million documents from over 7,000 publishers worldwide, more than 1.8 billion citations and 17 million author profiles, Scopus has been at the forefront of academic discovery and the advancement of knowledge for two decades now. Throughout this time, the Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) opens in new tab/window has played an incredibly important role in Scopus’s development.

Content on Scopus is curated by the CSAB, an international group of scientists and researchers, most with journal editor experience, who represent the major scientific disciplines. Alongside the feedback we collect from the research community and our technology and data science experts at Elsevier, the board is responsible for ensuring high-quality trusted content is indexed on Scopus. Year-round, these editorially independent subject matter experts review all titles that are suggested to Scopus using strict title section criteria opens in new tab/window. They are also vigilant in identifying and discontinuing journals that are — or have become — predatory, hijacked or of poor quality.

Threats to the integrity of research are complex and are becoming more sophisticated, with new technologies and an increase in bad actors playing a role. These topics were discussed by the CSAB when they met for their biannual board meeting in November 2024.

“When we started this board 20 years ago, we knew where we were and what we had to deal with,” said Prof David Rew opens in new tab/window, CSAB Board Member and Subject Chair for Medicine, Dentistry, and Veterinary Sciences. “Many journals were published in print, and so there were few producers in the field.

“Entry into publishing is now much easier. There has been an explosion in the number of journals, and the barrier of entry has virtually disappeared. This means that fraudulent actors are on the rise as they can make fake websites look as good as well-resourced publishers in the field, so they can falsify research and deceive others.”

Bad actors include:

• Paper mills: These are unscrupulous businesses that profit from authors who are willing to pay to be included as co-authors on articles.

• Hijacked journals: These are online websites that use the name, reputation, ISSN, logos, and other metadata of legitimate journals without authorization in order to deceive potential authors and collect fees for online publication.

• Predatory journals: These are produced by deceitful businesses that produce very low-quality journals cheaply without providing proper peer review and editing, in order to make money.

The human insight of the CSAB is invaluable in addressing these threats. Prof Jaya Raju opens in new tab/window, CSAB Board Member and Subject Chair of Library and Information Sciences and Multidisciplinary Research, explains:

We are taking steps to address challenges and look at many factors, especially as the subject chairs. We meet regularly to discuss these issues, and this is part of the process. We don’t just rely on tech, which does play a huge role now in detecting issues.

This rapid growth in technology also impacts the genuine research and researchers. As our recent AI report opens in new tab/window highlighted, 92% of researchers think AI will help rapidly increase the volume of scholarly research, and 87% think it will help increase work quality overall. However, as the CSAB Board discussed, this volume needs to be balanced by critical thinking.

Prof Peter Miller opens in new tab/window, CSAB Board Member and Subject Chair for Psychology explained:

There is already a crisis in science following the pandemic, and we need to be careful on the use of AI. The advancements of technology are great; however, AI cannot replace critical thinking. We need to be incredibly aware of bias within AI; this is not something we want in research. Further downfalls of AI are that future generations may limit their creativity.

The board emphasized GenAI’s role as a tool to augment human intelligence rather than replace critical thinking and original research.

“There is responsibility on all sides here” said Prof Jörg-Rüdiger Sack opens in new tab/window, Chair of the CSAB and Subject Chair for Computer Science. “Technology, and the continuous advancements of tech are here to stay, and we need to adapt, which we have always done.

“Scopus, with its two decades of experience and cutting-edge innovations, continues to lead the charge in this critical balancing act, ensuring that the pursuit of knowledge remains both revolutionary and reliable. As we look to the future, the research community must embrace AI’s potential whilst fiercely protecting the foundations of scientific integrity.”

By utilizing advanced engineering, data science and new technologies to minimize risk, Scopus is at the forefront of combating these challenges. One thing is certain: The human oversight and critical thinking the CSAB provides will always remain the most important element in safeguarding research on Scopus.