public understanding of science (bristol, england) | Journament

Journal Ranking

#137 / 33,956
📊 Below Average
Overall Score
44.1/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
30
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
34
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 3 days ago

public understanding of science (bristol, england)

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
Quality Widget - Embed on Your Website

Display your journal's quality scores on your website with our beautiful, self-contained widget. Choose between two embedding methods below.

One-Line JavaScript Embed (Recommended):
Advantages:
  • ✅ Simpler integration (just one line of code)
  • ✅ Better SEO (content is in same DOM)
  • ✅ No iframe limitations
  • ✅ Fully self-contained (no dependencies)
  • ✅ Works on any website regardless of CSS framework
  • ✅ Clickable badges link to full journal page
iFrame Embed Code:
Limitations:
  • ⚠️ Display-only (scores not clickable due to iframe constraints)
  • ⚠️ May have SEO limitations
  • ⚠️ Potential CORS/CSP issues on some websites
Preview:
Indexings
ncbi
Short Name public underst sci
Abbreviated Name public underst sci
ISSN 1361-6609
Aim and Scope
URL http://pus.sagepub.com
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (9 total)

2018
udenafil, a phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, reduces body weight in high-fat-fed mice
;Seong Yul Ryu;Yoon-Jung Choi;So-Young Park;Jong-Yeon Kim;Yong-Dae Kim;Yong-Woon Kim
Vol. 36 , No. 1 , pp. 41-49
346 views DOI Abstract
2019
Experiences and expertise of codependency: Repetition, claim-coupling, and enthusiasm.
Winter, Katarina;
Vol. 28 , No. 2 , pp. 146-160
326 views DOI Abstract
2018
Why Popper can't resolve the debate over global warming: Problems with the uses of philosophy of science in the media and public framing of the science of global warming.
Mercer, David;
Vol. 27 , No. 2 , pp. 139-152
326 views DOI Abstract
2017
erectile dysfunction in men with and without lower urinary tract symptoms in nigeria
;Patrick Temi Adegun;Peter Olufemi Areo;Abidemi Solomon;Samuel Ayokunle Dada;Philip Babatunde Adebayo
Vol. 35 , No. 2 , pp. 107-114
316 views DOI Abstract
2017
Taking climate change seriously: An analysis of op-ed articles in Spanish press.
Domínguez, Martí;Lafita, Íngrid;Mateu, Anna;
Vol. 26 , No. 7 , pp. 861-871
301 views DOI Abstract
2018
"You need to do your research": Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology.
Carrion, Melissa L;
Vol. 27 , No. 3 , pp. 310-324
296 views DOI Abstract
2017
testosterone replacement therapy: long-term safety and efficacy
;Giovanni Corona;Alessandra Sforza;Mario Maggi
Vol. 35 , No. 2 , pp. 65-76
279 views DOI Abstract
2019
Shifting public engagement: How media coverage of climate change conferences affects climate change audience segments.
Wonneberger, Anke;Meijers, Marijn H C;Schuck, Andreas R T;
, pp. 963662519886474
256 views DOI Abstract
2015
Financial literacy: Do people know the ABCs of finance?
Lusardi, Annamaria;
Vol. 24 , No. 3 , pp. 260-71
251 views DOI Abstract
44
Overall
Below Average
30
35
30
40
34
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

44.1/100

Tier: Below Average

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

35.0/100

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

30.0/100

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

40.0/100

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

33.5/100

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

50.0/100

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

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

Ethics & Transparency Score

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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.