Journal rankings · indicator year 2017
Choose a field to open its ranking, or a journal to find its row in its subfield’s list.
Subfield ranking · 2017
Geology journal rankings 2017
15 ranked journals · Subfield in Earth and Planetary Sciences
Geology has 15 ranked journals in 2017. The median OJR fell 0.08 on 2016 to 0.56, below the world average of 1.00; Q1 starts at OJR 1.27. The top three are Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, Geoheritage, and The Photogrammetric Record.
Ranks and citation indicators: 2017. Journal access status and listed APC: source snapshot September 23, 2026.
Journals whose main subfield sits in this category and that published at least 30 citable documents (articles, reviews and conference papers) in 2014–2016, the window the 2017 score is computed on.
The OpenJournalRank Indicator (OJR) is a free, publicly available metric of a journal’s field-normalized citation impact, computed from open OpenAlex citation data. It compares citations to a journal’s papers from the previous three years with the world average for papers of the same subfield, year and type, so 1.00 is the world average and values can be compared across fields. It is computed with the NCI3 method.
The middle OJR among ranked journals in this category: half score higher, half lower. 1.00 is the world average for papers of the same subfield, year and type.
The dot is this category, the solid tick is the median of all ranked journals and the dashed line is the world average.
Share of ranked journals in this category that are fully open access, so every paper is free to read. Hybrid journals, which sell subscriptions and open single papers for a fee, are not counted.
Median list price of the article processing charge, in US dollars, among ranked journals in this category that list a price above zero. Journals with a listed APC of $0 and journals with no known price are left out of this median. The At a glance table below gives a second median that includes the $0 prices.
Subfields of Earth and Planetary Sciences (8)
15 ranked journals
Filters
Rank is the position by OJR within the list on screen; 1 is the highest. | OJR is field-normalized 3-year citation impact: 1.00 is the world average for papers of the same subfield, year and type, so values compare across fields. The badge is the journal’s quartile in this list. | Citations per paper over a two-year window, counted from OpenAlex. It is not field-normalized, so compare it only between journals of the same field. ▲ or ▼ is the change from 2016. This is OpenJournalRank’s own count, not Clarivate’s Journal Impact Factor. | Citable documents (articles, reviews and conference papers) published in 2014–2016, the window the 2017 OJR is computed on. A journal needs at least 30 to be ranked. | Share of the journal’s 2014–2016 papers that are free to read in any open-access form. The green OA tag next to a title marks a fully open-access journal. | List price of the article processing charge in US dollars. “$0 listed” means the listed price is zero; a dash means no price is listed. | The line is the journal’s OJR from 2008 to 2017. | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural HeritageElsevier BV · Netherlands | 3.86Q1 | 2.24 0.69 up from 2016 | 39 | 17% | $2,810 | ||
2GeoheritageSpringer Science+Business Media · Germany | 2.08Q1 | 3.10 1.33 up from 2016 | 114 | 29% | $2,490 | ||
3The Photogrammetric RecordWiley · United Kingdom | 1.36Q1 | 0.87 0.96 down from 2016 | 175 | 31% | $3,030 | ||
42015 Digital HeritagePublisher not listed | 1.27Q1 | 0.58 0.20 up from 2016 | 297 | — | — | ||
5Virtual Archaeology ReviewOATechnical University of Valencia · Spain | 0.92Q2 | 0.89 0.46 up from 2016 | 106 | 100% | — | ||
6EpisodesOAInternational Union of Geological Sciences | 0.88Q2 | 1.24 0.30 up from 2016 | 161 | 100% | — | ||
7International Journal of Heritage in the Digital EraSAGE Publishing · United Kingdom | 0.85Q2 | 0.68no change | 62 | — | — | ||
| 0.56Q2 | 0.82 0.21 down from 2016 | 4,048 | 100% | — | |||
9Geological Society London MemoirsZoological Society of London · United Kingdom | 0.55Q3 | 0.74 0.71 down from 2016 | 332 | 12% | — | ||
10GEUS BulletinOAGeoloical Survey of Denmark and Greenland · Denmark | 0.36Q3 | 0.52 0.05 up from 2016 | 76 | 100% | — | ||
11Dicengxue zazhiChina | 0.16Q3 | 0.33 0.26 up from 2016 | 55 | — | — | ||
12Marine Geology & Quaternary GeologyScience Press · China | 0.11Q3 | 0.06 0.06 down from 2016 | 125 | — | — | ||
13Geoinformatics FCE CTUOACzech Technical University in Prague · Czechia | 0.09Q4 | 0.10 0.33 down from 2016 | 45 | 100% | — | ||
14Marine Geology FrontiersPublisher not listed | 0.06Q4 | 0.09no change | 93 | — | — | ||
15The Compass Earth Science Journal of Sigma Gamma EpsilonPublisher not listed | 0.00Q4 | 0.00 0.08 down from 2016 | 33 | 50% | — |
Subfields of Earth and Planetary Sciences, with Geology highlighted.
- Geophysics147
- Atmospheric Science89
- Paleontology73
- Oceanography55
- Geology15
- Earth-Surface Processes14
- Geochemistry and Petrology8
- Space and Planetary Science4
Journals
Citations made in 2017. Corpus-wide, 77.7% of core-journal articles and reviews published that year have at least one matched reference; the share varies by journal and field.
6 additional Geology journals with metrics are unranked under this release’s eligibility rules: a journal needs at least 30 citable documents in 2014–2016, at least 80% of them with a subfield, and a positive world-average expectation. Ranks are within the whole category; filters hide rows without re-ranking. OJR excludes self-citations.
At a glance
Indicator year: 2017. Publication window: 2014–2016. How these summaries are calculated
- Ranked journals
- 15
- Window papers (baseline)
- 17,140 +27.3% from indicator year 2014
- Median OJR
- 0.559 -26.2% from indicator year 2014
- Rising journals (2025)
- 1
Window papers are the baseline paper population: citable papers (articles, reviews and conference papers) from 2014–2016 in all journals of the world-average baseline, including non-core journals, counted by each paper’s own subfield. They are not the papers of the ranked journals alone.
| Measure | Year series | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ranked journals | 4 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 13 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 16 | 15 | 13 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | |
| Window papers (baseline) | 3,561 | 5,212 | 5,725 | 6,196 | 5,837 | 6,325 | 6,701 | 6,789 | 7,391 | 8,336 | 9,194 | 10,081 | 11,046 | 12,283 | 13,467 | 14,643 | 15,610 | 17,140 | 18,484 | 19,808 | 21,137 | 21,307 | 21,305 | 20,480 | 20,957 | 21,193 | |
| Median OJR | 0.582 | 0.31 | 0.05 | 0.563 | 0.714 | 0.46 | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.32 | 0.35 | 0.10 | 0.25 | 0.59 | 0.74 | 0.76 | 0.61 | 0.64 | 0.559 | 0.57 | 0.706 | 1.17 | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.575 |
How to read these rankings
- OJR, the OpenJournalRank Indicator
- A field-normalized 3-year citation impact, computed from OpenAlex with the NCI3 method. It divides the citations a journal’s papers received by the world average for papers of the same subfield, year and type, so 1.00 is the world average and 2.00 means twice as many citations as expected. Because it is normalized, it can be compared across fields. Read the methodology
- Quartiles
- Q1 to Q4 split the ranked journals of the list you are viewing into four equal groups by OJR. A journal’s quartile depends on the list: the same journal can be Q1 in its subfield and Q2 among all journals.
- Impact factor (2-year)
- Citations per paper over a two-year window, counted from OpenAlex. It is easy to compare with familiar impact factors but is not field-normalized, so compare it only within a field. It is not Clarivate’s Journal Impact Factor. Why it differs from the Journal Impact Factor
- Rank ranges
- Each rank in the latest year carries a likely range from 1,000 resamples of the journal’s papers. Where two journals’ ranges overlap, the data cannot tell them apart, so treat neighbouring ranks as ties.