The Internationalization of Psychology Journals in Brazil: A Bibliometric Examination Based on Four Indices

Abstract

There is considerable variability among psychology journals in Brazil, in terms of presence on the international stage. However, research as to why is very scarce. This study empirically examined the relationship between several indices of internationalization and real-world internationalization, among these journals. 661 articles from the top-17 psychology journals in Brazil were coded for: English-language text, editorial board makeup, lead author institution, and article type. Analyses revealed that successful internationalization was
associated with: (a) lead author institution from a native English-speaking country; (b) empirical articles; and (c) editorial board members from a native English-speaking country. Use of English-language text was not associated with successful internationalization. These findings suggest that the path to internationalization for psychology journals in Brazil may depend on increased publishing of findings from English-speaking countries; or at the very least: increased collaboration between Brazilian and native English-speaking scholars.
Keywords: globalization, scientific journals, psychology, Brazil, bibliometric analysis

Full text

7
Paidéia
jan-apr. 2017, Vol. 27, No. 66, 7-15. doi:10.1590/1982-43272766201702
Article
The Internationalization of Psychology Journals in Brazil: A Bibliometric
Examination Based on Four Indices1
Chris Fradkin2
University of California, Merced, USA
Abstract: There is considerable variability among psychology journals in Brazil, in terms of presence on the international stage. However,
research as to why is very scarce. This study empirically examined the relationship between several indices of internationalization and
real-world internationalization, among these journals. 661 articles from the top-17 psychology journals in Brazil were coded for: English-
language text, editorial board makeup, lead author institution, and article type. Analyses revealed that successful internationalization was
associated with: (a) lead author institution from a native English-speaking country; (b) empirical articles; and (c) editorial board members
from a native English-speaking country. Use of English-language text was not associated with successful internationalization. These
ndings suggest that the path to internationalization for psychology journals in Brazil may depend on increased publishing of ndings
from English-speaking countries; or at the very least: increased collaboration between Brazilian and native English-speaking scholars.
Keywords: globalization, scientic journals, psychology, Brazil, bibliometric analysis
A Internacionalização dos Periódicos de Psicologia no Brasil: Uma Análise
Bibliométrica Baseada em Quatro Índices
Resumo: Há uma variação considerável na presença internacional entre os periódicos de psicologia no Brasil. No entanto, a investigação
a respeito do porquê é muito escassa. Este estudo examinou empiricamente a relação entre vários índices de internacionalização e a
internacionalização real entre essas revistas. 661 artigos provenientes das 17 melhores revistas de psicologia foram codicados para: texto
em Inglês, composição do conselho editorial, instituição do autor principal e tipo de artigo. As análises revelaram que a internacionalização
foi associada a: (a) instituição do autor principal de um país nativo de língua inglesa; (b) artigos empíricos; e (c) membros do conselho
editorial nativos de um país de língua inglesa. Não foi encontrada associação entre o uso do texto na língua inglesa e a internacionalização
bem sucedida. Estes achados sugerem que o caminho para a internacionalização de periódicos de psicologia no Brasil pode depender do
aumento da publicação de resultados de países de língua inglesa; ou, pelo menos, uma maior colaboração entre estudiosos brasileiros e
nativos de língua inglesa.
Palavras-chave: globalização, periódicos cientícos, psicologia, Brasil, análise bibliométrica
La Internacionalización de las Revistas de Psicología en Brasil: Un Examen
Bibliométrico Basado en Cuatro Índices
Resumen: Existe una considerable variabilidad en la internacionalización de las revistas de psicología en Brasil, pero la investigación de
por qué es muy escasa. Este estudio examinó la relación entre varios índices de internacionalización y la internacionalización real. 661
artículos de las 17 mejores revistas de psicología fueron codicados para: texto en inglés, composición del comité editorial, institución
del autor, y el tipo de artículo. Los análisis revelaron que la internacionalización se asoció con: (a) la institución del autor en un país
de lengua inglesa; (b) los artículos empíricos; y (c) los miembros de la comité editorial de un país de lengua inglesa. El uso del idioma
inglés no se asoció con la internacionalización. Estos hallazgos sugieren que la internacionalización de las revistas de psicología en Brasil
podría depender del aumento en la publicación de resultados de los países de lengua inglesa; o al menos una mayor colaboración entre los
estudiosos brasileños y los estudiosos nativos de lengua inglesa.
Palabras clave: globalización, revistas cientícas, psicología, Brasil, análisis bibliométrico
1
2
1 Correspondence address:
Chris Fradkin. University of California, Merced, Psychological Sciences,
5200 N. Lake Road, Merced, CA 95343, United States of America.
E-mail: chrisfradkin@gmail.com
2 Grateful acknowledgement is expressed to research assistant Jailene
Gutierrez.
Over the last decade, psychology journals in Brazil
have undertaken a commitment to internationalization.
Evidence is seen in summary materials (abstracts and titles)
and supplementary issues, many of which now appear
in English (Fradkin, 2015). Evidence is also seen in the
increased presence of Brazilian journals in the international
Scopus database (Gamba, Packer, & Meneghini, 2015).
Furthermore, rankings of Brazil’s higher-education programs
by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education
Personnel (CAPES), a federal agency of the Ministry of
Education, include internationalization indices as part of their
assessments (Menandro, Linhares, Bastos, & Dell’Aglio,
2015). While Brazil has secured in-roads in the lingua-franca
market, in psychology Brazil still lags globally. With Brazilian
journals in psychology ranked in the 3rd through 5th quintiles
internationally (SCImago Journal & Country Rank - http://
www.scimagojr.com/), there is much work to be done to reach
Available in www.scielo.br/paideia

8
Paidéia, 27(66), 7-15
developed-nation status.
In 2015, a supplementary issue of Psicologia: Reexão e
Crítica (Gomes & Fradkin, 2015a) focused almost exclusively
on the internationalization of Brazil’s psychology. Raising the
quality of Brazil’s output in this eld and competing in the
global market were frequent themes throughout that issue,
as they are throughout most Latin American congresses
as well. At that time, only one of Brazil’s psychology
journals (Psychology & Neuroscience) had a foothold in
the international market, with a recently-formed partnership
with the American Psychological Association (APA). Since
then, Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica itself, has graduated to
the “big leagues,” now in partnership with the international
publisher Springer (Remor, 2016). With two of Brazil’s
psychology journals now on the worldwide stage, we ask:
What differentiates these journals from the rest?
To address this question, we begin with our conception
of internationalization. As internationalization is a latent
variable, we must measure it through observable variables, or
proxies. As socioeconomic status is measured through income
and/or education level (Williams & Collins, 1995); and
depression, through attributional style (Hu, Zhang, & Yang,
2015); so internationalization must be measured – but through
which variables? When we consult the Scientic Electronic
Library Online (SciELO), the bibliographic database that
hosts more than 1,200 Iberoamerican scientic journals, we
nd that scientic director, Rogério Meneghini, provides
specic recommendations for the internationalization of
emerging-nation journals. Meneghini (2013) recommends:
(1) the use of English language; (2) the inclusion of non-
Brazilian internationals in the editorial process; and (3) the
publishing of work by non-Brazilian authors. As Meneghini’s
name, along with that of SciELO’s Abel Packer, is considered
synonomous in many circles with the rising prole of Brazil’s
scientic journals, we will use his recommendations in this
study. In addition, we will include: (4) study style. We now
address these variables one-by-one.
As the scientic world communicates in English
(Gibbs, 1995), use of English-language text is critical. While
there is a place for local language (for addressing regionally-
specic health risks, for example), publishing in English is
essential (Meneghini & Packer, 2007; Vasconcelos, Sorenson,
& Leta, 2007). For emerging nations like Brazil, this prospect
can be daunting – the translation, the expense, the standards
of the global market – but Brazilians must remember: To
disseminate our science, we must publish in English. This is
non-negotiable; English is the lingua franca. We now shift
focus to the editorial board.
A journal’s editorial board reects its worldliness,
its prestige, its vision, and its scope (Bedeian, Van Fleet, &
Hyman, 2009). For emerging-nation journals, Meneghini
(2013) recommends enrollment of international editors –
those with name recognition and track records with successful,
lingua-franca journals. He recommends periodic meetings
between these parties and the national editorial board; and
predicts their presence will attract higher-grade reviewers for
submissions. And the higher-grade reviewers – lingua franca,
naturally – will in turn attract higher-grade submissions. This
leads us to our next point: the publishing of work by foreign
authors.
The publishing of work by foreign authors distinguishes
international from emerging-nation journals. Meneghini
(2013) reports that less than 15% of the content from journals
edited in England, Netherlands, and Switzerland originates
from authors inside these countries’ borders. By contrast,
more than 70% of the content from the BRICS nations (Brazil,
Russia, India, China, South Africa) originates from authors
inside these countries’ borders (Meneghini, 2013). What this
sets forth is the hallmark of international research: knowledge
forged from the far reaches of the globe that has an entirety
much larger than its parts. Part of this diversity in country of
contribution evolves organically: as the contents of a journal
reach a more-diverse and sophisticated audience – at that
point, submissions widen, too. But in the meantime: global
contributions lead to global readership. We now address the
variable: study style.
Generally speaking, psychology journals spread their
knowledge through empirical reports and descriptive/
summary reports. For the most part, international journals
contain a higher percent of empirical reports, and domestic
journals a higher percent of descriptive/summary reports
(VandenBos & Winkler, 2015). As there is variability in
study style among Brazilian journals, we will include this
variable in our study. This addition brings our indices to
four. As these indices, to date, have not been empirically
examined, we will refer to them hereafter as presumed.
Thus, our presumed indices of internationalization include
the three (3) variables from Meneghini (2013), plus the
variable study style.
The aim of this study, therefore, was to empirically
examine the relationship between the presumed indices of
internationalization and real-world internationalization,
among the top journals in psychology in Brazil. Based on
the weight of ndings from past research, we hypothesized
that, in relation to Brazilian psychology journals of lower
internationalization, Brazilian psychology journals of higher
internationalization would have a higher prevalence of: (a)
English-language text; (b) editorial board members from
native English-speaking countries; (c) lead authors afliated
with institutions in native English-speaking countries; and
(d) empirical articles.
Method
A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the top-
ranked Brazilian psychology journals from the year 2015.
This analysis assessed the relationship between the presumed
indices of internationalization and the journals’ status in terms
of internationalization.

9
Fradkin, C. (2017). Bibliometric Examination of Psychology Journals.
Sample
SCImago provides a ranking of scientic journals based
on the number of citations received by a journal and the
importance or prestige of the journals where such citations
came from. Of the 1,044 worldwide psychology journals
listed in the 2014 SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR), 17 (1.6%)
were included from Brazil. These journals comprised this
study’s sample. From the output of these journals for the year
2015 (759 articles), 672 research articles were included in the
study. Excluded were: editorials, book reviews, interviews,
corrections, letters, obituaries, and re-publications of
historical works.
Measures
English-language text. English-language text refers
to the language of the body of the article, independent of
the title and the abstract. Inclusion of English-language text
was recorded dichotomously (English/no-English) article-
by-article within each issue of each journal for the year.
Prevalence of English-language text was calculated separately
for each journal in the study: n articlesENGLISH ÷ n articlesTOTAL.
Editorial board makeup. Editorial board makeup
articulates the percentage of each journal’s editorial board
that is afliated with an institution based in a lingua-franca,
i.e., English-speaking, country. These gures included
editorial board personnel only, excluding titled editorial
staff such as editors, associate editors, assistant editors, copy
editors, layout people, and technical personnel. Prevalence
of editorial board lingua franca was calculated separately for
each journal in the study: n editorial boardLINGUA FRANCA ÷ n
editorial boardTOTAL.
Lead author institution. Lead author institution
differentiates between articles in which the lead author is
afliated with an institution in a lingua-franca, English-
speaking, country, and articles in which the lead author is not
afliated with an institution in a lingua-franca country. Lead
author institution was recorded dichotomously (lead author
lingua franca/no lead author lingua franca) article-by-article
within each issue of each journal for the year. Prevalence of
lead author lingua franca was calculated separately for each
journal in the study: n articlesLEAD AUTHOR LINGUA FRANCA ÷ n
articlesTOTAL.
Study style. Study style differentiates between articles
based on empirical reports vs. articles based on descriptive/
summary reports. Inclusion criteria for empirical reports
was that the article be data-driven and offer ndings of
statistical report. Study style was recorded dichotomously
(empirical/non-empirical) article-by-article within each issue
of each journal for the year. Prevalence of empirical articles
was calculated separately for each journal in the study: n
articlesEMPIRICAL ÷ n articlesTOTAL.
Publication house. Publication house articulates the
publishing structure through which the journal disseminates its
work. This information was gathered from each journal’s web
site and reported dichotomously (international publication
house/no international publication house).
Procedure
Data collection. Research articles (e.g., research
reports, reviews, and theoretical articles) were included
in the study. Non-research articles (e.g., editorials, book
reviews, interviews, corrections, letters, obituaries, and
re-publication of historical works) were excluded. From a
starting pool of 759 articles, 87 non-research articles were
excluded resulting in 672 research articles for the sample.
Articles were coded for language, lead author institution,
and study style. Articles were then scored dichotomously for
text language (English or no-English), lead author institution
(from lingua franca or non-lingua franca country), and study
style (empirical or non-empirical). Information on each
journal’s publication house and editorial board makeup
was gathered from the journal’s web site. (Raw data for
language and lead author institution available upon request.)
As two of the journals were published through international
publishing houses, we used the variable publication house
(international or Brazilian) to differentiate journals of higher
versus lower internationalization status.
Data analysis. Analyses were performed using
SPSS version 16.0. First, frequencies of the dichotomous
variables (English text, lead author institution, study
style) were tallied and converted to percentages of each
journal’s total articles (e.g., English-language text = n
articlesENGLISH ÷ n articlesTOTAL). Editorial board makeup
was converted to percentage for each journal (Lingua-
franca editorial board = n editorial boardLINGUA FRANCA ÷
n editorial boardTOTAL). The variable publication house
was used as a proxy for successful internationalization,
thereby dening the two groups for comparison: journals
of higher internationalization (n = 2) and journals of lower
internationalization (n = 15). Prior to hypothesis testing,
the variables were examined for normality of distribution.
The Shapiro-Wilk test revealed non-normality; therefore
transformations were attempted. When transformations
failed to normalize the data, a nonparametric approach
was opted for. The Mann-Whitney U test was selected.
The Mann-Whitney U test is used frequently when data
are non-normally distributed (Bergmann, Ludbrook, &
Spooren, 2000), and is effective when working with small
samples (Acion, Peterson, Temple, & Arndt, 2006). To test
Hypotheses 1-4, signicant main effects for English text,
editorial board makeup, lead author institution, and study
style were separately examined with the Mann-Whitney
U test set at p < .05 two-tailed. In addition, a t-test was
conducted to ascertain differences in the SCImago Journal
Ranking (SJR) indicator, between international and
Brazilian journals.

10
Paidéia, 27(66), 7-15
Results
Descriptive Statistics
As shown in Table 1, all Brazilian journals in our sample
rank in the third, fourth, or fth quintiles internationally,
placing them below the international average. On the
domestic front, eight of the seventeen journals are currently
indexed by the SciELO database, attesting to their presence
in the Latin American and Caribbean markets. It should be
noted that of the nine journals not indexed by SciELO, two
of them recently withdrew from SciELO upon partnership
with international publishing houses (Psychology &
Neuroscience and Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica). Also
shown is the CAPES Qualis indicator, a rating administered
by the Brazilian Ministry of Education, which assigns the
majority of our journals (14/17) their highest or second
highest rating (A1 or A2, respectively). As measured by
the SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) indicator, Figure 1
reveals an impact differential of 26 to 1 between the top-ve
international psychology journals (M = 7.36, SD = 1.73) and
the top-ve Brazilian psychology journals in our sample (M
= 0.28, SD = 0.05), t(4.007) = 9.11, p = .001, two-tailed.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics of the Top Brazilian Psychology Journals
Rank
Brazil
Rank
World
Quintile
World Journal Worldwide (N) Est. SJR
Rating
Impact
Factor
SciELO
Inclusion
Qualis
Ratinga
Publication
House
(1,044)
1611 3rd Psicologia e Sociedade 1986 0.36 0.16 Yes A2 Brazil
2 676 4th Paidéia 1991 0.30 0.30 Yes A1 Brazil
3 725 4th Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 1985 0.26 0.23 Yes A1 Brazil
4 736 4th Psychology & Neuroscience 2008 0.25 0.58 NobA2 Int’l
5 748 4th Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica 1988 0.24 0.27 NocA1 Int’l
6 787 4th Revista Latinoamericana de
Psicopatologia Fundamental 1998 0.22 0.06 Ye s A2 Brazil
7 799 4th Revista Brasileira de Orientação
Prossional 2000 0.21 0.11 No A2 Brazil
8 800 4th Psicologia Escolar e Educacional 1996 0.21 0.18 Yes A2 Brazil
9 894 5th Psicologia Clínica 1989 0.15 0.08 NodA2 Brazil
10 927 5th Psicologia USP 1990 0.13 0.14 Yes A2 Brazil
11 943 5th Estudos de Psicologia (Natal) 1996 0.13 0.12 Yes A1 Brazil
12 945 5th Arquivos Brasileiros de
Psicologia 1949 0.13 0.05 No A2 Brazil
13 953 5th Psicologia em Estudo 1996 0.12 0.06 NoeA1 Brazil
14 961 5th Ágora: Estudos em Teoria
Psicanalítica 1998 0.12 0.04 Yes A2 Brazil
15 1,012 5th Revista Brasileira de Neurologia
e Psiquiatria 1997 0.10 0.00 No B4fBrazil
16 1,034 5th Revista da Abordagem Gestáltica 1995 0.10 0.02 No B1 Brazil
17 1,038 5th Tempo Psicanalítico 1978 0.10 0.00 No B1 Brazil
Note. Most recent rankings by SCImago (for the year 2014); SJR Rating, SCImago Journal Rank indicator; Est., established; Impact Factor,
2014 citations of articles published 2012-13; Int’l, international.
aQualis 2014 Psicologia rating (except when noted).
bIndexed in SciELO 2008-2014; withdrawn from SciELO upon partnership with APA in 2015.
cIndexed in SciELO 1999-2015; withdrawn from SciELO upon partnership with Springer in 2016.
dIndexed in SciELO 2005-2015; indexing interrupted Sept., 2015.
eIndexed in SciELO 2000-2014; indexing interrupted Sept., 2015.
fQualis 2014 Medicina I rating.

11
Fradkin, C. (2017). Bibliometric Examination of Psychology Journals.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Ann Rev of Psychology
Pers on Psych Science
Personnel Psychology
Psychological Bulletin
Journ of Applied Psych
Psi e Sociedade
Paidéia
Psi: Te oria e Pesquisa
Psych & Neurosci
Psi: Reflex ão e Crítica
Internati onal Brazilian
SJR
Figure 1. SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) of highest-ranking international (left) and Brazilian (right) psychology journals. SJR, SCImago
Journal Rank Indicator; Ann Rev of Psych, Annual Review of Psychology; Pers on Psych Science, Perspectives on Psychological Science;
Journ of Applied Psych, Journal of Applied Psychology; Psi e Sociedade, Psicologia e Sociedade; Paidéia, Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto); Psi: Teoria
e Pesquisa, Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa (Brasilia); Psych & Neurosci, Psychology & Neuroscience; Psi: Reexão e Crítica, Psicologia:
Reexão e Crítica.
Between-Groups Differences
Table 2 presents data for the four variables of interest.
Hypothesis 1 predicted that there would be a higher
prevalence of English-language text among the journals of
higher internationalization than among the journals of lower
internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the
prevalence of English-language text was not different between
the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 66.5%) and
the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 0.0%), U
= 3.00, p = .058. In the absence of a signicant main effect,
Hypothesis 1 was not supported.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that there would be a higher
prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-board members among
the journals of higher internationalization than among the
journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-Whitney
test revealed that the prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-
board members was higher among the journals of higher
internationalization (Mdn = 21.7%) than among the journals
of lower internationalization (Mdn = 6.9%), U = 1.50, p =
.041. In the presence of a signicant main effect, Hypothesis
2 was supported.
Hypothesis 3 predicted that there would be a higher
prevalence of articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca
institutions among the journals of higher internationalization
than among the journals of lower internationalization. A Mann-
Whitney test revealed that the prevalence of articles with lead
authors based at lingua-franca institutions was higher among
the journals of higher internationalization (Mdn = 10.5%)
than among the journals of lower internationalization (Mdn
= 0.0%), U = 0.00, p = .003. In the presence of a signicant
main effect, Hypothesis 3 was supported.
Hypothesis 4 predicted that there would be a higher
prevalence of empirical studies among the journals of
higher internationalization than among the journals of lower
internationalization. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the
prevalence of empirical studies was higher among the journals
of higher internationalization (Mdn = 89.0%) than among the
journals of lower internationalization (Mdn = 16.0%), U =
1.00, p = .036. In the presence of a signicant main effect,
Hypothesis 4 was supported.

12
Paidéia, 27(66), 7-15
Discussion
This study is the rst we are aware of that empirically
examined the relationship between commonly accepted
variables of internationalization and internationalization
itself, among psychology journals in Brazil. Inconsistent
with Hypothesis 1, as well as recent research (Packer, 2016;
VandenBos & Winkler, 2015), is the nding that English-
language text is not more prevalent among journals of higher
internationalization. Consistent with Hypothesis 2 is the
nding of a higher prevalence of lingua-franca editorial-
board members among journals of higher internationalization.
Consistent with Hypothesis 3 is the nding of a higher
prevalence of lead authors based at institutions in lingua-franca
countries, among journals of higher internationalization.
And consistent with Hypothesis 4 is the nding of a higher
prevalence of empirical articles among journals of higher
internationalization. To some it may appear that the key to
internationalizing these journals lies in removing Brazilian
input from the journals. We would counter that point though.
To do so, we now look at the ndings.
With regard to English-language text, emerging nation
journals that publish articles in English have the potential
to reach the global market. Those journals not publishing in
English will never reach the global market, i.e., the science
that they publish will be lost. This notion of lost science
(Gibbs, 1995) drives Brazil and other emerging nations to
Table 2
Top Brazilian Psychology Journals: 2015
Journal Total Docs. English Text (%) EB Lingua
Franca (%) LA Lingua (%) Empirical
Studies (%)
Psicologia e Sociedade 63 0.0 6.5 0.0 6.3
Paidéia 39 100.0 10.5 2.6 89.7
Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 59 0.0 13.0 0.0 55.9
Psychology & Neuroscience 41 100.0 30.0 17.1 87.8
Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica 103 33.0 13.3 3.9 90.3
Revista Latinoamericana de Psicopatologia
Fundamental 39 7.7 25.0 2.6 0.0
Revista Brasileira de Orientação Prossional 19 5.3 13.3 0.0 52.6
Psicologia Escolar e Educacional 59 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.3
Psicologia Clínica 25 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0
Psicologia USP 51 5.9 8.7 0.0 11.8
Estudos de Psicologia (Natal) 23 4.3 0.0 0.0 39.1
Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia 31 0.0 12.5 0.0 38.7
Psicologia em Estudo 44 100.0 5.0 0.0 6.8
Ágora: Estudos em Teoria Psicanalítica 18 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0
Revista Brasileira de Neurologia e Psiquiatria 16 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0
Revista da Abordagem Gestáltica 18 5.6 8.3 0.0 0.0
Tempo Psicanalítico 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Note. EB Lingua Franca (%), % editorial board members afliated with an institution in a lingua franca/English-speaking country; LA Lingua
Franca (%), % articles in which lead author is afliated with an institution in a lingua franca/English-speaking country.
increasingly publish articles in English. This trend can be
seen in the SciELO database, in which publication of English-
language articles has risen from 48% to 62%, from 2011 to
2015 (Packer, 2016). SciELO’s goal for the year 2019 is an
English-language publication rate of 75% (Packer, 2016).
And nally, based on data from the Web of Science (WoS),
Gamba et al. (2015) remind us that the 2012/2013 citations
for English-language articles were approximately twice
those for Portuguese articles (0.72 and 0.36, respectively),
published in Brazilian journals of psychology. This last nding
highlights the importance of English-language publication in
disseminating the science from Brazil.
But just because a journal publishes articles in English,
that of itself is not assurance of strong science. In fact, a
recent study (Fradkin, 2015) on the translational integrity of
summary materials in Brazilian psychology journals found
substantial variability in the integrity of such materials. The
study also found a signicant relationship (r = 0.62, p < .001)
between the translational integrity of the journal and the overall
impression the journal made with native English-language
scholars (Fradkin, 2015). This suggests that the simple
presence of articles in English is not a guarantee of scientic
rigor. This same caveat applies to internationalization: While
English is required to reach the lingua-franca market; by
itself, it is not sufcient for the task. Thus, what Finding 1
suggests is that Brazil’s commitment must go farther, in terms
of the quality and readability of its English.

13
Fradkin, C. (2017). Bibliometric Examination of Psychology Journals.
Finding 2, which found a higher prevalence of
lingua-franca editorial board members among journals of
higher internationalization, is consistent with Meneghini’s
(2013) recommendations. As is Finding 3, which found
a higher prevalence of articles with lead authors based at
lingua-franca institutions among those journals of higher
internationalization. These ndings, however, might court
controversy. To some, these ndings may suggest that the
key to the internationalization of scientic journals in Brazil
lies in removing Brazilian input from the journals. That is
not the case, however. Rather, the key to internationalizing
Brazil’s journals entails supplementing Brazilian input with
lingua-franca expertise. Expertise, in terms of seasoned
editors, reviewers, publishers, and authors. Professionals are
needed from the lingua-franca world to raise the standards of
the journals in Brazil. Assistance is required in: peer-review,
editorial decisions, structured abstracts, lingua-franca level
English, along with content focus for a global audience. These
areas, and more, are summed up by VandenBos and Winkler
(2015), in their comparison of differences between regional and
international journals. Of the four variables examined, having
articles with lead authors based at lingua-franca institutions
is statistically the strongest (U = 0.00, p = .003) of the
group, in its relationship with successful internationalization.
Hopefully, this nding will encourage Brazilian journals to
be more proactive in promoting international collaboration. If
for no other reason, the process of collaborating with scholars
who speak uent lingua franca can do nothing but enhance
Brazilian lingua-franca language skills.
The signicance of Finding 4, which found a higher
prevalence of empirical studies among journals of higher
internationalization, should provide motivation for non-
data-driven scholars to shift their focus, when they can, to
design studies methodologically more suited for the global
market. While there will always be journals that will publish
descriptive/summary reviews, there are many more that
will publish data-driven/empirical reports, especially in the
lingua-franca market.
In the realm of peer-review, an alternate proxy to
consider would be the proportion of international reviewers
screening papers at the journal. would be the proportion of
international reviewers screening papers at the journal. At
present, this information is not regularly disclosed; however,
a template can be viewed in an end-of-year assessment for the
journal Psychology & Neuroscience (Mograbi, 2014). As this
variable could be predictive of journal internationalization
status and quality of content, we recommend it be examined
in the future. And if the variable shows promise, we would
further recommend that it be mandated for disclosure for
all Brazilian scientic journals; and serve as a criterion for
the CAPES Qualis journal ranking. Such policy revision
could be promoted by Associação Nacional de Pesquisa e
Pós-graduação em Psicologia (ANPEPP) – an organization
committed to the betterment of graduate programs in
psychology; and one that has a history of facilitating change.
This study, using a sample of the top-ranked Brazilian
psychology journals, aimed to empirically examine the
relationship between four commonly-presumed indices
of internationalization and the journals’ status in terms of
internationalization. Although much has been written about
the internationalization of Brazil’s higher-education programs
(Bastos, Tomanari, Trindade, & Andery, 2015; Bianco, Hutz,
& Yamamoto, 2015; Menandro et al., 2015) and scientic
journals (Gomes & Fradkin, 2015b; Hanes, 2014; Meneghini
& Packer, 2007; Packer, 2016), this is the rst study we are
aware of that has empirically examined these relationships,
within a bibliometric format.
Nonetheless, this study may provoke debate about
internationalization, as a concept; as a term. In a study such
as ours, internationalization refers to a second-tiered science
rising to a top-tiered status. Hypothetically, that success might
be inferred when the top-ve Brazilian journals in our eld rank
in the 1st (top) quintile internationally. However, other scholars
might contend that internationalization is achieved when
journals publish for a truly global audience, in an assortment
of publication languages. Among the journals in our sample,
this criterion is met most closely by Revista Latinoamericana
de Psicopatologia Fundamental, a Brazilian publication
that publishes summary materials (titles and abstracts) in
Portuguese, Spanish, English, French, German, and Chinese,
and texts in an assortment of Portuguese, Spanish, English,
and French. This publication, however, has an impact factor
of 0.06 (SCImago), which reects weak dissemination of its
ndings, in relation to the other journals in our sample (Table
1). Thus, we see that there are two divergent models (lingua-
franca vs. multicultural) that use the term internationalization
for very different meanings. Moving onward from semantics,
we will now discuss the study’s limitations.
One limitation of this study was discussed earlier:
the non-normality of the data, which precluded parametric
analyses. Another limitation was the small size of the groups
that we compared (n higher internationalization = 2; n lower
internationalization = 15). In response to these limitations,
we employed the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test
(Bergmann et al., 2000). We wish to report, however, that
the Mann-Whitney ndings were consistent with Pearson
Product-Moment correlations, which we ran parallel to the
analyses reported here.
Another limitation – or challenge, if you will – was the
operationalization of study styles. While we used empirical
and non-empirical to distinguish the two styles, some may
take issue with our terminology. While we acknowledge that
we could have been more specic in our choice (e.g., data-
driven and non-data-driven), we chose empirical because the
term is used more commonly in science. With regard to these
descriptives, future studies might consider slightly different
operationalizations of this variable when designing their
methodologies.
A further limitation concerns directionality. We should
ask ourselves, for example, with regard to Finding 4: “Does
higher internationalization lead to greater publication of
empirical papers?” or “Do journals publishing a higher
proportion of empirical papers offer a more attractive business
model to international publishing houses?” The reader must
be wary; they must be circumspect; they must move slowly in
assumptions of causality.

14
Paidéia, 27(66), 7-15
A nal limitation worth mentioning would be the
generalizability of our ndings. As this study was specic to
Brazilian journals of psychology, its ndings best apply within
that purview. While aspects of our methods could certainly be
used in further studies on the internationalization of emerging-
nation journals – of different nations, different disciplines,
for example – we by no means present these ndings as a
template, ready-made, to solve the challenges of emerging-
nation journals. We present these data and these ndings as
they pertain to psychology journals in Brazil – at this point
in Brazil’s history and her growth. And methodologically:
as this study is cross-sectional in nature, causality cannot be
inferred. And, nally, as this study is a snapshot of one year’s
worth of issues, we should refrain from projecting outcomes
for the future.
Nonetheless, there are implications in this study; and
bits of our report propel us forward. If for nothing else, this
study offers an empirical evaluation of Meneghini (2013)
and SciELO’s (Packer, 2016) ideas on internationalization,
as they pertain to emerging-nation journals. In this aspect,
the study conrms several of their ideas (lingua-franca
editorial board; lead author lingua-franca institution) as
extremely viable; and concludes that one (English-language
text) must be rened and more thought out. So, as to the
presumed nature of these indices of internationalization,
we are happy to report that they are viable foundations
we can build from. And building from foundation is what
scientic research is. As to the implementation of these
variables tied to internationalization, we must be cautious
in our assumptions of direction. We must remember that
modifying editorial-board makeup to majority lingua-franca
membership will not, in and of itself, bring a Springer or
a Wiley to the table. And more importantly: that modied
editorial-board makeup, in and of itself, will not magically
increase our quality of science. We might be more astute
in seeing that a higher quality of science would be more
likely to attract seasoned lingua-franca scholars – to serve
advisorships on editorial boards. And the same sensibility
might increase submissions from lead authors from lingua-
franca institutions. And in this cycle, our journals spread
their wings; and what was once earth-bound, now will y.
As the young bird leaves its nest, so our science nds its
wings; and through this process, science is evolving.
This is not to say that Brazilian journals should not
strive to internationalize; they should. In fact, these variables
we examined could serve as starting points. Starting points
to spread the knowledge that the journal is professing; to
upgrade its quality and worldliness; and to diversify its
science through global authorship – these starting points can
serve as a beginning. The good news is that, to many lingua-
franca scholars, Brazilian science is very much an unknown
factor. Thus, through the internationalization of her science,
Brazil can make a clean and fresh impression to a world of
scholars in the waiting.
References
Acion, L., Peterson, J. J., Temple, S., & Arndt, S. (2006).
Probabilistic index: An intuitive non-parametric approach
to measuring the size of treatment effects. Statistics in
Medicine, 25(4), 591-602. doi:10.1002/sim.2256
Bastos, A. V. B., Tomanari, G. Y., Trindade, Z. A., & Andery,
M. A. P. A. (2015). The psychology postgraduate system
in Brazil: Current characteristics and challenges for the
area. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1), 23-33.
doi:10.1590/16787153.2015284005
Bedeian, A. G., Van Fleet, D. D., & Hyman, H. H. (2009).
Scientic achievement and editorial board membership.
Organizational Research Methods, 12(2), 211-238.
doi:10.1177/1094428107309312
Bergmann, R., Ludbrook, J., & Spooren, W. P. J. M. (2000).
Different outcomes of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney
test from different statistics packages. The American
Statistician, 54(1), 72-77. doi:10.1080/00031305.2000.1
0474513
Bianco, A. C. L., Hutz, C. S., & Yamamoto, M. E. (2015).
Internationalization: Towards new horizons. Psicologia:
Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1), 49-56. doi:10.1590/1678-
7153.2015284008
Fradkin, C. (2015). A summary evaluation of the top-ve
Brazilian psychology journals by native English-language
scholars. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1), 99-
111. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840014
Gamba, E. C., Packer, A. L., & Meneghini, R. (2015).
Pathways to internationalize Brazilian journals of
psychology. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1),
66-71. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840010
Gibbs, W. W. (1995). Lost science in the Third World.
Scientic American, 273(2), 92-99. doi:10.1038/
scienticamerican0895-92
Gomes, W. B., & Fradkin, C. (2015a). Editorial. Psicologia:
Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1), 1. doi:10.1590/1678-
7153.2015284001
Gomes, W. B., & Fradkin, C. (2015b). Historical notes on
psychology in Brazil: The creation, growth and sustenance
of postgraduate education. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica,
28(Suppl. 1), 2-13. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.2015284002
Hanes, W. F. (2014). Nominal groups as an indicator of non-
native English communication problems in top-ranked
Brazilian science journals. Belas Inéis, 2(2), 127-139.
Retrieved from http://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/
belasineis/article/view/10625/7691
Hu, T., Zhang, D., & Yang, Z. (2015). The relationship between
attributional style for negative outcomes and depression: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
34(4), 304-321. doi:10.1521/jscp.2015.34.4.304

15
Fradkin, C. (2017). Bibliometric Examination of Psychology Journals.
Menandro, P. R. M., Linhares, M. B. M., Bastos, A., &
Dell’Aglio, D. D. (2015). The Brazilian psychology
postgraduate system and the internationalization process:
Critical aspects, evaluation indicators and challenges for
consolidation. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl.
1), 57-65. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.2015284009
Meneghini, R. (2013). Scielo, Scientic Electronic
Library Online, a database of open access journals.
Higher Learning Research Communications, 3(3), 3-7.
doi:10.18870/hlrc.v3i3.153
Meneghini, R., & Packer, A. L. (2007). Is there science beyond
English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility
of non-English publications might help to break down
language barriers in scientic communication. EMBO
Reports, 8(2), 112-116. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400906
Mograbi, D. C. (2014). Psychology & Neuroscience indicators
in 2013: Evidence of growth and internationalization.
Psychology & Neuroscience, 7(2), 61-63. doi:10.3922/j.
psns.2014.022
Packer, A. L. (2016). The adoption of English among SciELO
Brazil journals has been increasing. SciELO in Perspective.
Retrieved from http://blog.scielo.org/en/2016/05/10/the-
adoption-of-english-among-scielo-brazil-journals-has-
been-increasing/
Remor, E. (2016). A new era for the journal Psicologia:
Reexão e Critica. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 29(1),
1-3. doi:10.1186/s41155-016-0011-2
VandenBos, G. R., & Winkler, J. M. (2015). An analysis of the
status of journals and research in psychology from Latin
America. Psicologia: Reexão e Crítica, 28(Suppl. 1), 82-
93. doi:10.1590/1678-7153.20152840012
Vasconcelos, S. M. R., Sorenson, M. M., & Leta, J. (2007).
Scientist-friendly policies for non-native English-
speaking authors: Timely and welcome. Brazilian Journal
of Medical and Biological Research, 40(6), 743-747.
doi:10.1590/S0100879X2007000600001
Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (1995). US socioeconomic
and racial differences in health: Patterns and explanations.
Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 349-386. doi:10.1146/
annurev.so.21.080195.002025
Chris Fradkin is a Lecturer/Researcher at the University of
California.
Received: June 23, 2016
1st Revision: Aug. 06, 2016
Approved: Aug. 11, 2016
How to cite this article:
Fradkin, C. (2017). The internationalization of psychology
journals in brazil: A bibliometric examination based on
four indices. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 27(66), 7-15.
doi:10.1590/1982-43272766201702