Introduction

Background

Recently, the Indonesian journal landscape has experienced rapid and diverse growth. As of June 2025, Indonesia had 26,726 journals listed in the Indonesian digital portal (GARUDA, Garba Rujukan Digital; https://garuda.kemdikbud.go.id/journal), the principal database for Indonesian journals, which provides references and access to scientific works produced by Indonesian scholars and researchers, primarily in scientific journals [1]. Additionally, the Directorate General of Higher Education of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture introduced national journal accreditation in 2018 to evaluate the quality of journals, their management, and published articles through the national journal accreditation system (ARJUNA, Akreditasi Jurnal Nasional) [2,3]. SINTA (Science Technology Index; https://sinta.kemdikbud.go.id/journals) subsequently included these accredited journals in its database [4]. According to SINTA’s classification, there were 13,522 accredited Indonesian journals.

GARUDA and SINTA have become the two principal Indonesian journal databases. GARUDA contains almost all Indonesian journals, while SINTA includes only accredited journals. These databases are expected to provide scholars and researchers with comprehensive and precise journal information, including subject areas [5]. Journal subject information is essential for guiding scholars and researchers in selecting journals relevant to their article topics [5], conducting subject classification to clarify the focus and scope of various journal fields [6], facilitating efficient journal searches and knowledge dissemination [7], and evaluating journal impact and quality by accounting for potential biases [8].

Studies on journal characteristics by subject have taken varied approaches. Gu and Blackmore [6] discussed the evaluation of journals based on subject area coverage across five databases. Leydesdorff et al. [9] assessed journal rankings based on interdisciplinarity, exploring how journals span different disciplines. Wijewickrema [10] investigated authors’ perceptions of journal relevance and coverage in various subject domains across databases including the Web of Science and Scopus. Collectively, these studies have provided valuable insights into evaluating and understanding the impact of journals by analyzing subject distribution and comparing the coverage of different databases, thereby supporting researchers in journal selection and publication strategies.

Specifically, Wiryawan [11] described the characteristics of Indonesian journals according to their category: nonaccredited, accredited, and international. Winarko et al. [12] evaluated the quality, trustworthiness, and usability of Indonesian agricultural science journals. Handoko [13] discussed the status of 60 Indonesian journals in Islamic economics and finance as classified by SINTA. Suhandoko et al. [14] examined the academic vocabulary used in Indonesian SINTA journals related to applied linguistics. These studies mainly focused on the quantity and quality of journals by category [11] and analyzed journals in specific subject areas [12–14]. Other studies addressed subject analysis of articles by Indonesian authors through systematic reviews, and therefore did not provide a comprehensive description of Indonesian journals by their subject coverage.

Objectives

This study examined the characteristics of Indonesian journals based on subject area and coverage, utilizing data from 26,726 journals in GARUDA and 13,522 accredited journals in SINTA. Specifically, we analyzed four aspects: the breadth of subjects covered by each journal, the number of journals in each subject area, the relationship among subjects within the databases, and the top publisher with the greatest number of journals in each subject area.

Methods

Ethics statement

This study did not involve human or animal subjects and was based exclusively on literature databases; therefore, institutional review board approval and informed consent were not required.

Study design and setting

This descriptive study mapped Indonesian journals and their corresponding subject areas. Journal metadata were collected from GARUDA and SINTA. Web mining was employed to gather the data on June 5, 2025.

Data sources and preparation

A total of 26,726 journal records were obtained from GARUDA and 13,522 from SINTA. We excluded 451 records from GARUDA that were conferences and 5 records from SINTA that were disabled, resulting in 26,275 GARUDA journals and 13,517 SINTA journals for analysis.

Variables and bias

In the GARUDA metadata, there are 40 subject areas and 10 subject cores used to identify journal subjects, while SINTA employs 10 subject areas. The subject core records in GARUDA are identical to the subject area records in SINTA. Therefore, this study used records from GARUDA subject cores and SINTA subject areas—hereinafter referred to as the subjects—as detailed in Table 1. For each journal, we extracted the journal title, publisher name, and subject fields. No selection bias was present.

Measurements

We analyzed journal characteristics in relation to their subjects in GARUDA and SINTA across four aspects. First, we examined the number of subjects covered by each journal to determine the breadth of subject coverage. Second, we assessed the number of journals covering each subject to show the coverage of subjects by journals. Third, we conducted membership analysis of covered subject subsets within each database to elucidate relationships between subjects. Fourth, we identified publishers with the largest number of journals covering each subject. Python and its libraries (Python Software Foundation), including Matplotlib, Seaborn, and Upsetplot, were used for data analysis and visualization (Suppl. 1–5).

Statistical methods

Descriptive statistics were used.

Results

A journal may cover one or more subject areas. Fig. 1 displays the distribution of the number of subjects covered by each journal, illustrating the breadth of subject coverage. In GARUDA, 344 of the 26,275 journals (1.3%) lacked subject information, while in SINTA, 10,132 of the 13,516 journals (75.0%) did not have assigned subjects. Among journals with subject data, each GARUDA journal had an average of 2.13 subjects, whereas the average for SINTA journals was 1.76. The number of subjects per journal varied more widely in GARUDA, with a median of 2 (interquartile range [IQR], 1–3). In contrast, SINTA journals had a median number of 1 (IQR, 1–2).

Fig. 2 illustrates the distribution of the number of journals per subject. GARUDA included 25,931 journals with at least one subject, while SINTA included 3,384. The number of subject-journal pairs was 55,167 in GARUDA and 5,951 in SINTA. In both databases, the most significant proportion of journals belonged to the subject “education” (SA4), followed by “social” (SA10) in GARUDA and “science” (SA9) in SINTA. The three predominant subject areas in both databases were “education” (SA4), “science” (SA9), and “social” (SA10). The subjects with the lowest proportion of journals in GARUDA were, in order, “art” (SA2), “agriculture” (SA1), and “religion” (SA8), while in SINTA, they were “religion” (SA8), “art” (SA2), and “agriculture” (SA1).

Journals in SINTA exhibited greater variation in subject assignment than those in GARUDA, with a standard deviation of 6.3% (373 of 5,961 journals) compared to 6.2% (3,446 of 55,167) in GARUDA. A comparison of subject proportions in SINTA versus GARUDA showed that “art” (SA2) and “agriculture” (SA1) had the highest relative proportions, at 1.59 and 1.43, respectively. Conversely, the lowest proportions were observed in “religion” (SA8) and “humanities” (SA7), at 0.64 and 0.78, respectively.

The scope of Indonesian journals ranged from single-subject to multisubject coverage. Fig. 3 shows the relationship between subjects in GARUDA journals and their breadth of coverage, displaying 15 out of 524 subject subsets (Dataset 1). Breadth of coverage is indicated by the number of subjects assigned: the greater the number, the broader the journal’s scope. Single-subject journals represented the largest group, accounting for 25,931 journals in GARUDA, most notably in “education” (3,372 journals, 13.0%), “social” (1,616 journals, 6.2%), and “economy” (1,559 journals, 6.0%). Among multisubject journals, the most extensive coverage was seen in {“science,” “engineering”} (1,129 journals, 4.4%), {“education,” “social”} (1,004 journals, 3.9%), and {“education,” “social,” “humanities”} (612 journals, 2.4%).

Fig. 4 illustrates the relationships between subjects in SINTA journals and their breadth of coverage, showing 15 of the 184 subject subsets (Dataset 2). In SINTA, single-subject journals made up the largest proportion (3,384 journals) primarily in “education” (613 journals, 18.1%), “social” (279 journals, 8.2%), and “health” (264 journals, 7.8%). The most extensive multisubject journal groupings were {“science,” “engineering”} (133 journals, 3.9%), {“education,” “social”} (101 journals, 3.0%), and {“education,” “science”} (97 journals, 2.9%).

Table 2 presents the top publishers for each journal subject in GARUDA. The leading publishers in all subject areas were higher education institutions. The highest proportion of journals within a subject was found for Institut Pertanian Bogor, which accounted for 2.4% of the 2,085 journals in “agriculture.” The highest average number of journals per publisher across all subjects was 3.84, based on 3,117 publishers and 11,971 journals in “education,” with Universitas Negeri Semarang as the top publisher. The number of journals per publisher and subject varied from 1 to 2.

Table 3 lists the top publishers for each journal subject in SINTA. The leading publishers included both higher education institutions and government agencies. The highest publisher-to-subject proportion was Institut Pertanian Bogor, which accounted for 5.3% of the 321 journals in “agriculture.” The highest average number of journals per publisher across all subjects was 2.67, from 513 publishers and 1,372 journals in “education.” The IQR for the number of journals per publisher and subject was 1.

Discussion

Key results

The analysis of Indonesian journals in GARUDA (26,275 journals) and SINTA (13,516 journals) showed that 1.3% of GARUDA journals lacked subject information, compared to 75.0% in SINTA. On average, GARUDA journals covered 2.13 subjects, while SINTA journals covered 1.76. The most significant shares in GARUDA were in education (21.7%), social sciences (18.4%), and science (14.3%). Top publishers were predominantly higher education institutions, with Institut Pertanian Bogor accounting for 2.4% of journals in the agriculture sector.

Interpretation/comparison with previous studies

Cho et al. [5] emphasized that journal databases should provide scholars and researchers with accurate and comprehensive information, including journal subject areas. Such information is essential for enabling scholars to browse and select journals relevant to their article topics [6,8,10]. As the primary Indonesian journal databases, GARUDA and SINTA provide subject area metadata to support their users.

Our analysis revealed that “education,” “social,” and “science” were the most frequently covered subject areas in both databases, indicating a substantial focus on these disciplines. Among the most significant journal publishers in these areas listed in GARUDA were Universitas Negeri Semarang (“education” and “social”) and Universitas Diponegoro (“science”). In SINTA, Universitas Negeri Semarang, one of Indonesia’s leading educational institutions [15], was the most dominant in all three areas. By contrast, Kim and Jeong [16] reported that “health” was the leading subject in Scopus when using the All Science Journal Classification method. These discrepancies can be attributed to differences in classification systems and the journal sets included in each database [17].

We also found that GARUDA journals exhibited a wider range and coverage of subject areas per journal than SINTA journals, with GARUDA journals covering one to six subjects (median number of subjects, 2) and SINTA journals covering one to three subjects (median number of subjects, 1). Indonesian journals with a single-subject area were mainly in “education,” “social,” and “economy.” Most multisubject journals included combinations such as {“science,” “engineering”}, {“education,” “social”}, and {“education,” “social,” “humanities”}. Journals with broader subject areas are often cited across different disciplines, leading to higher citation counts and impact [18,19]. These journals also tend to have greater geographic diversity among authors and exhibit higher interdisciplinarity, enriching research perspectives and contexts [9,20]. While the breadth of subject areas may similarly influence Indonesian journals, further studies are needed to evaluate these effects.

Limitations

This study relied on metadata obtained through data mining from the GARUDA and SINTA websites. Because the data on both platforms is dynamic, the number and content of records may change over time.

Conclusions

This study mapped the subject areas of Indonesian journals in GARUDA and SINTA, focusing on four key aspects: the breadth of subjects per journal, the number of journals per subject, relationships among covered subjects, and the leading publishers by subject. The results indicated that GARUDA journals exhibited a broader range and coverage of subject areas than SINTA journals. Indonesian journals were found to predominantly cover “education,” “social,” and “economy,” and higher education institutions play a crucial role in publishing journals across all subject areas. Mapping the breadth of journal coverage and interrelationships between subject areas may encourage future research on their influence on journal impact, author diversity, and interdisciplinary collaboration.

Notes

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding

This work was supported by the Research for International Publication Scheme in 2025 with the Chief’s Decree of the Institute for Research and Community Service, Universitas Diponegoro (No. 222-576/UN7.D2/PP/IV/2025).

Data availability

Data analyzed in this study are available from GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital; https://garuda.kemdikbud.go.id) and SINTA (Science and Technology Index; https://sinta.kemdikbud.go.id). The dataset files used in this study are available from Harvard Dataset files are available from the Harvard Dataverse at https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QDOXSH.

Dataset 1. Relationships between subjects in GARUDA journals.

kcse-382-dataset-1.xlsx

Dataset 2. Relationships between subjects in SINTA journals.

kcse-382-dataset-2.xlsx

Supplementary materials

Fig. 1.

Journal subject distribution. GARUDA, Garba Rujukan Digital; SINTA, Science and Technology Index.

Fig. 2.

Number of journals over subjects. GARUDA, Garba Rujukan Digital; SINTA, Science and Technology Index.

Fig. 3.

Relationship between subjects in GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital) journals (15 of 524 subject subsets).

Fig. 4.

Relationships between subjects in SINTA (Science and Technology Index) journals (15 of 184 subject subsets).

References

• 1. Aji RF. Pengembangan GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital) sebagai sumber rujukan karya ilmiah di Indonesia [Development of GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital) as a source of reference for scientific work in Indonesia]; Seminar Nasional Aplikasi Teknologi Informasi (SNATI); 2010 https://journal.uii.ac.id/Snati/article/view/1870.
• 2. Indonesian Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education. Peraturan Menteri Riset, Teknologi, dan Pendidikan Tinggi Republik Indonesia Nomor 9 Tahun 2018 tentang Akreditasi Jurnal Ilmiah [Decree of the Minister of Research, Technology and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia Number 9 of 2018 on Accreditation Guidelines of Scientific Journals] [Internet]. Indonesian Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education; 2018 [cited 2025 Jun 3]. Available from: https://peraturan.go.id/id/permenristekdikti-no-9-tahun-2018.
• 3. Directorate General of Higher Education. Keputusan Direktur Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi Nomor 134/E/KPT/2021 tentang Pedoman Akreditasi Jurnal Ilmiah [Decree of the Director of Directorate General of Higher Education Number 134/E/KPT/2021 on Accreditation Guidelines of Scientific Journals] [Internet]. Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia; 2021 [cited 2025 Jun 3]. Available from: https://arjuna-api-zmltmhkk4a-et.a.run.app/api/private-files/file/info/Pedoman_Akreditasi_Jurnal.pdf.
• 4. Lukman L, Dimyati M, Rianto Y, et al. Proposal of the S-score for measuring the performance of researchers, institutions, and journals in Indonesia. Sci Ed 2018;5:135-41.https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.138. Article
• 5. Cho SN, Seo TS, Choi HY, Park SA. Analysis of journal attributes of 403 KoreaScience journals from the viewpoint of author. Sci Ed 2016;3:19-25.https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.58. Article
• 6. Gu X, Blackmore K. Characterisation of academic journals in the digital age. Scientometrics 2017;110:1333-50.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2219-4. Article
• 7. Xie Y, Wu Q, Zhang P, Li X. Information Science and Library Science (IS-LS) journal subject categorisation and comparison based on editorship information. J Informetr 2020;14:101069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101069. Article
• 8. Singh P, Piryani R, Singh VK, Pinto D. Revisiting subject classification in academic databases: a comparison of the classification accuracy of Web of Science, Scopus & Dimensions. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 2020;39:2471-6.https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-179906. Article
• 9. Leydesdorff L, Wagner CS, Bornmann L. Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity: a tribute to Eugene Garfield. Scientometrics 2018;114:567-92.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2528-2. ArticlePubMedPMC
• 10. Wijewickrema M. Authors’ perception on abstracting and indexing databases in different subject domains. Scientometrics 2021;126:3063-89.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03896-0. Article
• 11. Wiryawan KG. The current status of science journals in Indonesia. Sci Ed 2014;1:71-5.https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.2014.1.71. Article
• 12. Winarko B, Abrizah A, Tahira M. An assessment of quality, trustworthiness and usability of Indonesian agricultural science journals: stated preference versus revealed preference study. Scientometrics 2016;108:289-304.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1970-x. Article
• 13. Handoko LH. Current status of Indonesian journals in the field of Islamic economics and finance. Sci Ed 2020;7:61-4.https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.191. Article
• 14. Suhandoko S, Ningrum DR, Wardani AD, Nobair A, Intan PK. Academic vocabulary distribution in applied linguistics journal research articles: do SINTA rankings matter? J Lang Educ 2024;10:95-107.https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2024.18411. Article
• 15. Prasojo LD, Fatmasari R, Nurhayati E, Darmadji A, Kusumaningrum FA, Andriansyah Y. Indonesian state educational universities’ bibliometric dataset. Data Brief 2018;22:30-40.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.11.128. ArticlePubMedPMC
• 16. Kim E, Jeong DY. Dominant characteristics of subject categories in a multiple-category hierarchical scheme: a case study of Scopus. Publications 2023;11:51. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11040051. Article
• 17. Aviv-Reuven S, Rosenfeld A. A logical set theory approach to journal subject classification analysis: intra-system irregularities and inter-system discrepancies in Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics 2023;128:157-75.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04576-3. Article
• 18. García JA, Rodriguez-Sánchez R, Fdez-Valdivia J. Scientific subject categories of Web of Knowledge ranked according to their multidimensional prestige of influential journals. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 2012;63:1017-29.https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22615. Article
• 19. Kim E. Does publisher volume matter? A cross-sectional analysis of Scopus journal publishing patterns. Publications 2025;13:17. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020017. Article
• 20. Li J, Yang X, Lu X, Wu D. Making journals more international: language subject differences and impact performance. Learn Publ 2023;36:596-618.https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1567. Article

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by