Which one is more valuable to send a paper (in computer science?

  1. A journal with a general scope of computer science from Elsevier, with impact factor of around 8. H index around 140.
  2. A journal with a specific scope, which is the scope of the paper. And is famous in that field and amoung the journals with that specific field. It is from ACM, with the impact factor of 2. H index around 30.

Both are Q1. And both have the same history in quartiles. I mean, both have been Q1 for many years, and before that they have been Q2, Q3 or so.

The time of review process and publication is not important for me.

Is there any other criteria that I should consider?

I found my answer some how in this link y the help of @"Nobody" in the comments. So I close my question.

  • 3
    More valuable to whom based on what criteria? Seems opinion-based.
    – Jon Custer
    Aug 24, 2023 at 21:58
  • For example, if I want to apply for a PHD position, which is more valuable to be in cv? For example, that's a common knowledge that most of the IEEE journals are valuable. Could you please compare them based on different critera?
    – m123
    Aug 24, 2023 at 22:02
  • 2
    Again, different folks will have different opinions. There is no universal ranking cheat sheet for PhD admissions in any field.
    – Jon Custer
    Aug 24, 2023 at 22:06
  • 1
  • 1
    I am glad it helped.
    – Nobody
    Aug 25, 2023 at 8:53

1 Answer 1


Depends on who is looking at your papers or CV. I for example do not go by journal name as I know that's not 100% guarantee of quality. Hence, I will read your papers and judge them myself. Another researcher, say one that cannot produce high quality work, may go with the fact that the paper is in a Q1 journal. Some researchers will only look at citations, and do not really care too much about where a paper appears. Researchers outside the community or management may only count number of papers. Yet some people will only care whether a paper has any practicality, i.e., led to a start up.

The 'successful' researchers will have all of the above; i.e., high number of papers, a subset of high quality and cited papers and maybe a start-up.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .