Timeline for What are journal rankings that employers look at?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20 at 16:41 | comment | added | David White | @R.vanDobbendeBruyn Thanks that's very helpful! Without revealing too much publicly, I can say that within the past couple of years, I read a letter from an external reviewer, that referenced the Australia ranking. So, it would be good to get this info out more publicly! | |
| Mar 20 at 16:35 | comment | added | R. van Dobben de Bruyn | While I have seen the Australian ranking used, I had the impression that it's not up to date. The linked question suggests that it stems from 2009, and at least it does not contain journals founded after 2010. You can easily find journals that have 'too low' rank in the 2009 version, for instance because they were relatively new (Algebra & Number Theory, founded 2007) or because they have become significantly more selective (I believe this is the case for Compositio Mathematica) (both examples are high Q1 in Scimago). Presumably the opposite happens too. | |
| Mar 20 at 14:32 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Stefan Kohl♦ | ||
| Mar 20 at 12:45 | history | edited | David White | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 705 characters in body
|
| Mar 20 at 12:35 | history | answered | David White | CC BY-SA 4.0 |