Journal Citation Reports* has released their annual ranking of journals for 2019. Math. CiteScore metrics from Scopus – comprehensive, current and free metrics for source titles in Scopus. Journal Rankings proposed by the Austral. Journal ranking is widely used in academic circles in the evaluation of an academic journal's impact and quality. Journal rankings are intended to reflect the place of a journal within its field, the relative difficulty of being published in that journal, and the prestige associated with it. The 2019 W&L Law Journal Rankings are now available! PDF | Top 500 Journals in 2019 - Journal Impact Factor List 2018 (JCR Released in 2019) | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate It is published primarily to assist academics to target papers at journals of an appropriate standard. As such, I used the 2019 peer score and the 2018 overall rank for Pepperdine for that year. ASA journals once again rank well against other journals in the discipline, with the American Sociological Review and Sociology of Education ranking in the top 10.The rankings below are within the category of Sociology unless specified otherwise. The Journal Quality List is a collation of journal rankings from a variety of sources. *** In the 2019 US News rankings, Pepperdine received a peer score of 2.6, but was listed as unranked after originally submitting incorrect data about incoming JD students (see Paul Caron’s note about this for more about this). In 2019, for the first time in the history of the ABDC Journal Quality List, the number of journals removed from the List has exceeded the number added. Released on June 1, 2020, the 2019 Rankings provide citation data and calculated ranks for the top 400 U.S.-published law journals and the top 100 law journals published outside the United States. The removal of 241 journals from the previous (2016) ABDC List is the result of a careful focus to ensure that the 2019 List reflects currency and continues to assist business researchers to target appropriate, quality outlets for their work. We would be concerned if the list were used for staff evaluation purposes in a mechanistic way. Society, FoR codes 01*