A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING MODEL FOR ACADEMIC JOURNAL EVALUATION USING AHP, TOPSIS, AND SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE, AND ABDC INDICATORS

Purpose - Selecting an appropriate academic journal is a critical decision that influences research visibility, citation impact, and academic recognition. This study proposes a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) model using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) to evaluate academic journals based on Scopus, Web of Science, and ABDC quality indicators. Methodology - A qualitative research approach was adopted through an extensive review of literature on journal evaluation, bibliometric indicators, and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making techniques. AHP was applied to determine the relative importance of journal evaluation criteria, while TOPSIS was used to rank journals according to their overall performance. Findings - The proposed model demonstrates that integrating multiple journal quality indicators provides a more objective and balanced evaluation than relying on a single metric. Combining Scopus, Web of Science, and ABDC indicators improves journal selection by simultaneously considering citation impact, indexing quality, academic reputation, and research visibility. Practical implications - The proposed framework assists researchers, faculty members, universities, journal editors, and research administrators in selecting suitable journals for publication, research evaluation, promotion, and institutional assessment. Originality - This study presents an integrated AHP–TOPSIS decision model that combines internationally recognized journal quality indicators into a unified evaluation framework, providing a transparent and systematic approach for academic journal selection.