Indexed in Journament

multivariate behavioral research

ISSN 1532-7906· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
35.7 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #8,100 of 29,312 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
5 Articles
Scores higher than 72.3% of scored journals
050100
The Journament Score is computed from platform statistics — reader engagement, accessibility, publication timeliness, keyword breadth, community impact and content distribution — into a single 0–100 figure, recalculated as new articles and metadata are indexed. Dimensions that cannot be measured for this journal are excluded rather than estimated. It is independent of the paid AI Quality Analysis, which never affects this score or the ranking. Full methodology →

About This Journal

Short Name multivariate behav res
Abbreviated Name multivariate behav res
ISSN 1532-7906

Quality Profile

5 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.9
Timeliness 0.0
Innovation 36.0
Community Impact 10.0
Content Distribution 92.6
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

7 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 5 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.9 30.4
Accessibility — 20.4
Timeliness 0.0 5.8
Diversity — 24.4
Innovation 36.0 25.7
Community Impact 10.0 5.8
Content Distribution 92.6 88.6
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (5)

Tests of Simple Slopes in Multiple Regression Models with an Interaction: Comparison of Four Approaches.
Liu, Yu;West, Stephen G;Levy, Roy;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 52 , No. 4 , pp. 445-464
442 views DOI Abstract
2015
Abstract: Probing Interactions in Multiple Regression: Frequentist Versus Bayesian Approaches.
Liu, Yu;West, Stephen G;Levy, Roy;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 50 , No. 1 , pp. 139
425 views DOI
Abstract: The Role of Social Enjoyment in Daily Fatigue among Women with Fibromyalgia.
Yeung, Ellen W;Aiken, Leona S;MacKinnon, David P;Davis, Mary C;
Vol. 49 , No. 3 , pp. 301
381 views DOI
2012
Estimating Latent Variable Interactions With Non-Normal Observed Data: A Comparison of Four Approaches.
Cham, Heining;West, Stephen G;Ma, Yue;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 47 , No. 6 , pp. 840-876
376 views Abstract
2019
aPRIDIT Unsupervised Classification with Asymmetric Valuation of Variable Discriminatory Worth.
Golden, Linda L;Brockett, Patrick L;Guillén, Montserrat;Manika, Danae;
, pp. 1-19
351 views DOI Abstract
2019
aPRIDIT Unsupervised Classification with Asymmetric Valuation of Variable Discriminatory Worth.
Golden, Linda L;Brockett, Patrick L;Guillén, Montserrat;Manika, Danae;
, pp. 1-19
351 views DOI Abstract
2015
Abstract: Probing Interactions in Multiple Regression: Frequentist Versus Bayesian Approaches.
Liu, Yu;West, Stephen G;Levy, Roy;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 50 , No. 1 , pp. 139
425 views DOI
2012
Estimating Latent Variable Interactions With Non-Normal Observed Data: A Comparison of Four Approaches.
Cham, Heining;West, Stephen G;Ma, Yue;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 47 , No. 6 , pp. 840-876
376 views Abstract
Abstract: The Role of Social Enjoyment in Daily Fatigue among Women with Fibromyalgia.
Yeung, Ellen W;Aiken, Leona S;MacKinnon, David P;Davis, Mary C;
Vol. 49 , No. 3 , pp. 301
381 views DOI
Tests of Simple Slopes in Multiple Regression Models with an Interaction: Comparison of Four Approaches.
Liu, Yu;West, Stephen G;Levy, Roy;Aiken, Leona S;
Vol. 52 , No. 4 , pp. 445-464
442 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
35.7/100 · Poor
Ranked #8,100 of 29,312 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

35.7/100

Tier: Poor

The Journament Overall Quality Score is a comprehensive metric that evaluates academic journals across multiple dimensions including engagement, accessibility, diversity, innovation, and community impact.

This score helps researchers, institutions, and publishers understand the holistic quality and impact of a journal beyond traditional metrics.

Engagement Score

30.9/100

Measures user interactions, views, citations, and community involvement with this journal's content.

Higher engagement scores indicate that the journal's content is actively being read, cited, and discussed within the academic community.

Accessibility Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates how easily researchers can access journal content, including open access availability, ISSN registration, and indexing.

This metric considers factors such as paywalls, open access policies, and availability across different academic databases and search engines.

Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses geographic and institutional diversity of authors, editorial board composition, and topic breadth.

A diverse journal publishes work from various geographic regions, institutions, and covers a broad range of topics within its field.

Innovation Score

36.0/100

Evaluates research novelty, interdisciplinary work, and emerging topics based on AI analysis of article abstracts.

This score reflects how much the journal publishes cutting-edge research, explores new methodologies, and bridges different academic disciplines.

Community Impact Score

10.0/100

Measures scholarly contribution and real-world applications of published research.

This metric evaluates how the journal's research translates into practical applications, policy changes, and benefits to society beyond academia.

Timeliness Score

0.0/100

Evaluates recent publication activity, publication frequency, and currency of research topics.

Higher scores indicate consistent publishing schedules and timely coverage of current research trends.

Content Distribution

92.6/100

Measures how evenly reader attention spreads across the journal's articles, using the Gini coefficient of article clicks.

Higher scores mean readership is distributed across many articles rather than concentrated on one or two.

Ethics & Transparency Score

Not yet measured

Research Integrity (10% weight)

Assesses COPE standards compliance, ethical considerations in research, transparency in methodologies, and reproducibility practices.

This metric ensures the journal maintains high ethical standards and promotes transparent, trustworthy research.

Content Quality Score

Not yet measured

Academic Rigor (20% weight) + Methodology Quality (12%)

Evaluates research methodology soundness, statistical rigor, theoretical framework strength, appropriateness of research methods, data quality, and clarity & readability.

This comprehensive metric ensures published research meets the highest academic standards.

Editorial Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Author Diversity + Interdisciplinary Value (8%)

Measures geographic diversity of authors, institutional variety, editorial board composition, and cross-disciplinary connections.

Diverse editorial teams bring varied perspectives and reduce bias in academic publishing.

Publication Regularity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses consistency of publication schedule, frequency stability, and predictable output patterns.

Regular publication schedules indicate reliable journal operations and consistent workflow management.

Geographic Reach Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates international author representation, global readership distribution, and cross-border research collaboration.

Wide geographic reach indicates global impact and international recognition of the journal's research.