Recent debates on research evaluation in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) have underscored the limitations of traditional bibliometric databases – such as Scopus and Web of Science – in capturing the linguistic and regional diversity characteristic of these fields. This study presents the first large-scale comparison between OpenAlex and Scopus, based on the journal classification system of Italy’s National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR). Using a data set of 23,304 classified journals, we compare the two databases in terms of coverage, language diversity, journal quality, and overlap. Our results show that OpenAlex indexes a substantially higher proportion of journals (66.9% vs 48.2%), includes more top-tier journals (81.9% vs 68.5%), and offers broader language inclusivity – particularly for French, Spanish, and German publications. However, unlike Scopus, OpenAlex does not apply editorial quality control mechanisms. We conclude by discussing the trade-offs between coverage and selectivity, and offer practical implications for the use of bibliometric data in SSH research assessment.
MelchiorsenPM. Bibliometric differences – a case study in bibliometric evaluation across SSH and STEM. J Doc2018; 75(2): 366–378.
2.
HicksDWoutersPWaltmanL, et al. Bibliometrics: the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature2015; 520(7548): 429–431.
3.
AksnesDWSivertsenG. A criteria-based assessment of the coverage of Scopus and Web of Science. J Data Inf Sci2019; 4(1): 1–21.
4.
McManusCBaeta NevesAA. Bibliometric measures in social sciences and humanities from different sources based on Brazilian data. Collnet J Scientometr Inf Manag2022; 16(2): 279–304.
5.
PedersenDBGrønvadJFHvidtfeldtR. Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities – a literature review. Res Eval2020; 29(1): 4–21.
HammarfeltBDe RijckeS. Accountability in context: effects of research evaluation systems on publication practices, disciplinary norms, and individual working routines in the Faculty of Arts at Uppsala University. Res Eval2015; 24(1): 63–77.
8.
NederhofAJ. Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: a review. Scientometrics2006; 66(1): 81–100.
9.
KulczyckiEGunsRPölönenJ, et al. Multilingual publishing in the social sciences and humanities: a seven-country European study. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol2020; 71(11): 1371–1385.
10.
HicksD. The four literatures of social science. In: MoedHFGlänzelWSchmochU (eds) Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems. Dordrecht: Springer, 2004, pp. 473–496.
11.
MongeonPPaul-HusA. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics2016; 106(1): 213–228.
12.
SivertsenG. Understanding and evaluating research and scholarly publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH). Data Inf Manag2019; 3(2): 61–71.
BordignonF. Is OpenAlex a revolution or a challenge for bibliometrics/bibliometrics?Groupe De Travail Science Ouverte UDICE, Bordeaux, 24March2024.
15.
JiaoCLiKFangZ. How are exclusively data journals indexed in major scholarly databases? An examination of the Web of Science, Scopus, Dimensions, and OpenAlex. arXiv Preprint, 2023, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.09704
16.
PriemJPiwowarHOrrR. OpenAlex: A fully open index of scholarly works, authors, venues, institutions, and concepts. arXiv Preprint, 2022, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.01833
17.
CulbertJHHobertAJahnN, et al. Reference coverage analysis of OpenAlex compared to Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics2025; 130(4): 2475–2492.
18.
KulczyckiEEngelsTCPölönenJ. Multilingualism of social sciences. In: Handbook on Research Assessment in the Social Sciences. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2022, pp. 350–366.
19.
Kancewicz-HoffmanNPölönenJ. Does excellence have to be in English? Language diversity and internationalisation in SSH research evaluation. In: OchsnerMKancewicz-HoffmanNHolowieckiM, et al. (eds) Overview of Peer Review Practices in the SSH. Brussels: European Cooperation in Science and Technology, 2020, pp. 32–41.
20.
CéspedesLKozlowskiDPradierC, et al. Evaluating the linguistic coverage of OpenAlex: an assessment of metadata accuracy and completeness. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol2025; 76(6): 884–895.
21.
SinghPSinghVKKanaujiaA. Exploring the publication metadata fields in Web of Science, Scopus and dimensions: possibilities and ease of doing scientometric analysis. J Scientometr Res2024; 13(3):715–731.
22.
VisserMVan EckNJWaltmanL. Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft academic. Quant Sci Stud2021; 2(1): 20–41.
23.
Archambault CampbellÉDGingrasYLarivièreV. Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol2009; 60(7): 1320–1326.
24.
BonaccorsiAFerraraAMalgariniM. Journal ratings as predictors of article quality in arts, humanities, and social sciences: an analysis based on the Italian research evaluation exercise. In: BonaccorsiA (ed.) The Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities: Lessons from the Italian Experience. Cham: Springer, 2018, pp. 253–267.
AriaMLeTCuccurulloC, et al. openalexR: An R-tool for collecting bibliometric data from OpenAlex. R J2024; 15(4): 167–180.
28.
Delgado-QuirósLOrtegaJL. Completeness degree of publication metadata in eight free-access scholarly databases. Quant Sci Stud2024; 5(1): 31–49.
29.
ZhangLCaoZShangY, et al. Missing institutions in OpenAlex: possible reasons, implications, and solutions. Scientometrics2024; 129(10): 5869–5891.
30.
KorytkowskiPKulczyckiE. Dominant language of researchers across fields. In: Third research evaluation in the SSH Conference (RESSH), Valencia, 19–20 September 2019.
ShamsiASilvaRCWangT, et al. A grey zone for bibliometrics: publications indexed in Web of Science as anonymous. Scientometrics2022; 127(10): 5989–6009.
33.
MongeonPHareMKrauseG, et al. Investigating document type discrepancies between OpenAlex and the Web of Science. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes Du Congrès Annuel De L’ACSI, Halifax Nova Scotia, Canada, 23 May 2025.
