Indexed in Journament

integrative play therapy

EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
22.8 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #28,084 of 29,312 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
14 Articles
Scores higher than 4.1% 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 integrative play therapy
Abbreviated Name integrative play therapy

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.3
Timeliness 0.0
Diversity 0.0
Innovation 19.5
Community Impact 5.7
Content Distribution 74.5
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

6 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 6 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for integrative play therapy
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.3 30.4
Accessibility 20.4
Timeliness 0.0 5.8
Diversity 0.0 24.4
Innovation 19.5 25.7
Community Impact 5.7 5.8
Content Distribution 74.5 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 (14)

2015
on the rule of law in the context of russian foreign policy
Vol. 3 , No. 2 , pp. 10-36
281 views DOI Abstract
2014
the judicial attempt at conciliation: the new section 185-bisof the italian code of civil procedure
Vol. 2 , No. 3 , pp. 80-95
279 views DOI Abstract
2017
post-crimean twister: russia, the eu and the law of sanctions
Vol. 5 , No. 3 , pp. 9-28
273 views DOI Abstract
2015
investment activities within the legal framework of the world trade organization
Vol. 3 , No. 4 , pp. 124-149
265 views DOI Abstract
2014
interpretation of written contracts in england
Vol. 2 , No. 1 , pp. 12-28
226 views DOI Abstract
2015
2017
the court of justice of the european union and international legal order
Vol. 5 , No. 3 , pp. 140-167
207 views DOI Abstract
2016
chief editor’s note on the review proceedings in russian civil procedure
Vol. 4 , No. 4 , pp. 4-6
204 views DOI Abstract
2014
interdisciplinary association of comparative and private international law
Vol. 2 , No. 3 , pp. -
200 views DOI Abstract
2017
the court of justice of the european union and international legal order
Vol. 5 , No. 3 , pp. 140-167
207 views DOI Abstract
2017
the case of the city of sevas topol: domestic and international law
Vol. 5 , No. 3 , pp. 69-85
120 views DOI Abstract
2017
post-crimean twister: russia, the eu and the law of sanctions
Vol. 5 , No. 3 , pp. 9-28
273 views DOI Abstract
2016
russian law and globalization
Vol. 4 , No. 4 , pp. 112-119
28 views DOI Abstract
2016
chief editor’s note on the review proceedings in russian civil procedure
Vol. 4 , No. 4 , pp. 4-6
204 views DOI Abstract
2015
investment activities within the legal framework of the world trade organization
Vol. 3 , No. 4 , pp. 124-149
265 views DOI Abstract
2015
on 2014 russian legal events
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. -
122 views DOI Abstract
2015
2015
on the rule of law in the context of russian foreign policy
Vol. 3 , No. 2 , pp. 10-36
281 views DOI Abstract
2014
interpretation of written contracts in england
Vol. 2 , No. 1 , pp. 12-28
226 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
22.8/100 · Poor
Ranked #28,084 of 29,312 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

22.8/100

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

30.3/100

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

0.0/100

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

19.5/100

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

5.7/100

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

74.5/100

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.