How We Review Journals, Publishers, and Academic Policies
SAR Publisher follows a transparent, evidence-based methodology when publishing journal reviews, publisher analyses, and academic guidance.
Our evaluations are not opinions and not endorsements. They are structured analyses based on verifiable indicators.
Sources of Information
We rely only on:
- Official journal and publisher websites
- Public indexing databases (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science, UGC CARE, DOAJ)
- Retraction and correction databases (where applicable)
- Public policy documents issued by regulatory bodies
- Official APC disclosures and author guidelines
No private, leaked, or confidential information is used.
Evaluation Indicators
Depending on the content type, analysis may include:
- Indexing status and continuity
- Publisher ownership and journal portfolio
- Article Processing Charges (APCs)
- Peer review and publication timelines (as publicly stated)
- Retraction records and public notices
- Compliance with stated ethical policies
Risk-Based Classification
Instead of labels such as “good” or “bad,” we use risk-oriented categories, such as:
- Suitable for regulated academic requirements
- Caution required
- High risk for career-oriented submissions
- Not suitable for accreditation or promotion purposes
These classifications are meant to support decision-making, not to make legal or moral judgements.
Updates and Corrections
Academic publishing is dynamic. Pages are updated periodically when:
- Indexing status changes
- Policies are revised
- Verified factual corrections are submitted