Indexed in Journament

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society

ISSN 1876-4452· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
33.8 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #10,542 of 29,297 scored journals (34,015 indexed)
18 Articles
Scores higher than 64% 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 Sci Justice
Abbreviated Name sci justice
ISSN 1876-4452

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 31.0
Timeliness 0.0
Diversity 44.4
Innovation 33.0
Community Impact 12.9
Content Distribution 72.4
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
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 31.0 30.4
Accessibility — 23.1
Timeliness 0.0 3.0
Diversity 44.4 26.4
Innovation 33.0 24.1
Community Impact 12.9 4.4
Content Distribution 72.4 89.3
Content Quality — 55.1
Ethics & Transparency — 40.5
Editorial Standards — 33.0
Publication Regularity — 52.9
Geographic Reach — 30.4

Publications Per Year

Articles (18)

2016
Discussion on how to implement a verbal scale in a forensic laboratory: Benefits, pitfalls and suggestions to avoid misunderstandings.
Marquis, Raymond;Biedermann, Alex;Cadola, Liv;Champod, Christophe;Gueissaz, Line;Massonnet, Geneviève;Mazzella, Williams David;Taroni, Franco;Hicks, Tacha;
Vol. 56 , No. 5 , pp. 364-370
531 views DOI Abstract
2018
Avoiding overstating the strength of forensic evidence: Shrunk likelihood ratios/Bayes factors.
Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart;Poh, Norman;
Vol. 58 , No. 3 , pp. 200-218
476 views DOI Abstract
2016
A demonstration of the application of the new paradigm for the evaluation of forensic evidence under conditions reflecting those of a real forensic-voice-comparison case.
Enzinger, Ewald;Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart;Ochoa, Felipe;
Vol. 56 , No. 1 , pp. 42-57
453 views DOI Abstract
2016
Special issue on measuring and reporting the precision of forensic likelihood ratios: Introduction to the debate.
Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart;
Vol. 56 , No. 5 , pp. 371-373
449 views DOI Abstract
2019
Management of crime scene units by Quebec police senior managers: Insight on forensic knowledge and understanding of key stakeholders.
Mousseau, Vincent;Baechler, Simon;Crispino, Frank;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 524-532
413 views DOI Abstract
2019
Scientific integrity in the forensic sciences: Consumerism, conflicts of interest, and transparency.
Passalacqua, Nicholas V;Pilloud, Marin A;Belcher, William R;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 573-579
403 views DOI Abstract
2019
The repeatability and reproducibility of the Sheffield Features of Gait Tool.
Birch, Ivan;Birch, Maria;Rutler, Lucy;Brown, Sarah;Burgos, Libertad Rodriguez;Otten, Bert;Wiedemeijer, Mickey;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 544-551
399 views DOI Abstract
2015
Terminology and forensic gait analysis.
Birch, Ivan;Vernon, Wesley;Walker, Jeremy;Young, Maria;
Vol. 55 , No. 4 , pp. 279-84
375 views DOI Abstract
2019
A risk-based approach to cognitive bias in forensic science.
Camilleri, Andrew;Abarno, Damien;Bird, Carolyne;Coxon, Anne;Mitchell, Natasha;Redman, Kahlee;Sly, Nicol;Wills, Stephen;Silenieks, Edmund;Simpson, Ellie;Lindsay, Heather;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 533-543
364 views DOI Abstract
2019
Investigating the effect photodegradation has on natural fibres at a microscopic level.
DeBattista, Roslyn;Tidy, Helen;Clark, Matthew;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 498-502
330 views DOI Abstract
2020
Sampling of explosive residues: The use of a gelatine-based medium for the recovery of ammonium nitrate.
Amaral, M A;Yasin, S;Gibson, A P;Morgan, R M;
Vol. 60 , No. 6 , pp. 531-537
90 views DOI Abstract
2019
A Bayesian approach based on Kalman filter frameworks for bullet identification.
Hesar, H Danandeh;Bigdeli, S;Moghaddam, M Ebrahimi;
Vol. 59 , No. 4 , pp. 390-404
211 views DOI Abstract
2019
Assessment of the Yfiler® Plus PCR amplification kit for the detection of male DNA in semen-negative sexual assault cases.
Henry, Julianne;Scandrett, Lenara;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 480-485
280 views DOI Abstract
2019
Evaluation of the one-step Lumicyano™ used in the visualisation of fingermarks on fabrics.
Beerman, Nicole;Savage, Anne;Dennany, Lynn;Fraser, Joanna;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 486-497
210 views DOI Abstract
2019
Investigating the effect photodegradation has on natural fibres at a microscopic level.
DeBattista, Roslyn;Tidy, Helen;Clark, Matthew;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 498-502
330 views DOI Abstract
2019
What do forensic analysts consider relevant to their decision making?
Gardner, Brett O;Kelley, Sharon;Murrie, Daniel C;Dror, Itiel E;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 516-523
228 views DOI Abstract
2019
Management of crime scene units by Quebec police senior managers: Insight on forensic knowledge and understanding of key stakeholders.
Mousseau, Vincent;Baechler, Simon;Crispino, Frank;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 524-532
413 views DOI Abstract
2019
A risk-based approach to cognitive bias in forensic science.
Camilleri, Andrew;Abarno, Damien;Bird, Carolyne;Coxon, Anne;Mitchell, Natasha;Redman, Kahlee;Sly, Nicol;Wills, Stephen;Silenieks, Edmund;Simpson, Ellie;Lindsay, Heather;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 533-543
364 views DOI Abstract
2019
The repeatability and reproducibility of the Sheffield Features of Gait Tool.
Birch, Ivan;Birch, Maria;Rutler, Lucy;Brown, Sarah;Burgos, Libertad Rodriguez;Otten, Bert;Wiedemeijer, Mickey;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 544-551
399 views DOI Abstract
2019
Two-dimensional linear analysis of dynamic bare footprints: A comparison of measurement techniques.
Nirenberg, Michael S;Ansert, Elizabeth;Krishan, Kewal;Kanchan, Tanuj;
Vol. 59 , No. 5 , pp. 552-557
283 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
33.8/100 · Poor
Ranked #10,542 of 29,297 scored
(34,015 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

33.8/100

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

31.0/100

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

44.4/100

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

33.0/100

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

12.9/100

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

72.4/100

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.