OpenJournalRank

Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition

University of Silesia in Katowice · Poland

ISSN-L
2450-5455
ISSN
2451-2125
OpenAlex ID
S4210186089
APC list price
Not listed
Full statisticsOpen accessIn DOAJCore list

In 2025, Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition had an OJR of 0.92: its 2022–2024 papers received 92% of the world-average citations for comparable papers. Its Impact factor (2-year) was 0.61. Both figures are calculated from OpenAlex data.

Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition is Q3 in OpenJournalRank’s 2025 Language and Linguistics ranking (#89 of 166 eligible journals). These are OJR quartiles, calculated independently of SCImago, Scopus and JCR quartiles.

In context

How Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition compares with the journals of its comparison group: Arts and Humanities. Windows are 2022–2024 (retractions 2015–2024).

Each group is the journal’s field, or its domain when the field has too few eligible journals. On each value track the shaded band is the middle half of the group and the tick its median. The percentile under it is a mid-rank position out of 100: journals with a lower value count fully and tied journals count half, so ties share a mid-rank. Colour marks only retractions, cost and an unusual self-citation share; other differences carry no quality judgement.

How field comparisons work

  • This journal
  • Median
  • Middle half of field

Integrity and cost

Retracted papers per 1,000

Papers marked retracted per 1,000 citable papers at the OpenAlex snapshot date; this does not show the reasons for retraction or assess a journal’s practices.

No comparison
—

Comparison group too small or not enough papers for this measure.

Listed APC (USD)

The article processing charge OpenAlex lists for the source; zero means a listed charge of $0.

Not listed
Not listedfield median $3,090

OpenAlex has no listed APC for this journal, so there is no cost comparison.

Check the publisher’s author guidelines for current charges.

Journal self-citation share

Share of citations to window papers that come from the same journal; a high share can reflect a narrow specialty and is not evidence of misconduct.

No comparison
—

Comparison group too small or not enough papers for this measure.

Openness and reach

Open access share

Share of window papers marked open access among papers with known OA status.

Middle half of the field: 29.4%–100.0%; median 52.7%; n = 536 field journals.

Typical for field
100.0%vs field median 52.7%
0%40%80%

Field percentile: 84/100 among 536 eligible journals

84/100

International collaboration share

Share of window papers with at least two distinct affiliation countries among papers with a known country.

Middle half of the field: 9.4%–24.2%; median 15.7%; n = 453 field journals.

Typical for field
11.8%vs field median 15.7%
0%10%20%30%

Field percentile: 34/100 among 453 eligible journals

34/100

Output growth

Change in citable paper counts between two adjacent three-year windows; it does not show changes in research quality or explain why output changed.

Middle half of the field: -17.5%–+15.1%; median -1.5%; n = 491 field journals.

Above typical range
+25.0%vs field median -1.5%
-40%0%+40%

Field percentile: 82/100 among 491 eligible journals

82/100

Document mix

Review share

Reviews as a share of all citable window papers.

Middle half of the field: 0.0%–0.0%; median 0.0%; n = 536 field journals.

Above typical range
2.9%vs field median 0.0%
0%1%2%3%

Field percentile: 96/100 among 536 eligible journals

96/100

Articles-only OJR

OJR for classified window articles only, using the same baseline cells as the overall score.

Middle half of the field: 0.37–1.38; median 0.78; n = 532 field journals.

Typical for field
1.19vs field median 0.78
0.00.51.01.5

Field percentile: 67/100 among 532 eligible journals

67/100

Citation distribution

Uncited share

Share of window papers receiving no non-self citations in the indicator year.

Middle half of the field: 46.4%–77.8%; median 64.8%; n = 536 field journals.

Typical for field
61.4%vs field median 64.8%
0%40%80%

Field percentile: 45/100 among 536 eligible journals

45/100

Citation concentration

Share of non-self citations received by the journal’s most-cited 10% of window papers.

Middle half of the field: 50.0%–74.3%; median 60.7%; n = 534 field journals.

Typical for field
58.7%vs field median 60.7%
0%40%80%

Field percentile: 46/100 among 534 eligible journals

46/100