How to Improve Your Journal’s Impact Factor: 9 Proven Strategies for 2026
Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board — PhD academics, peer-reviewed journal editors and subject-matter specialists.
Last updated: October 2026 • Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board • Reading time: 8 minutes
The journal impact factor (JIF) is still the metric authors, institutions and funders mention first, even though many of them say they should not. This guide explains how it is calculated, what a journal can and cannot do to influence it, and nine editorial practices that tend to raise citations without breaking the rules. It makes no promises about a number: a JIF is produced by Clarivate, not by the journal, and it moves with the field as well as with your work.
Key takeaways
- The JIF is a ratio: citations received in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) year to items the journal published in the previous two years, divided by the citable items it published in those two years.
- Since the 2023 JCR release, Clarivate has calculated a JIF for journals in all Web of Science Core Collection indexes, including the Emerging Sources Citation Index, so there is no fixed multi-year wait after indexing before a first JIF can appear.
- Most levers are editorial: what you select, how quickly you decide, how visible you make accepted work, and who you attract.
- Citation manipulation is detected and penalised. Clarivate can suppress a title from the JCR for anomalous self-citation or citation stacking.
- Single-number targets are unreliable. Compare your journal only with others in the same subject category.
How the impact factor and related metrics work
The calculation
For a JCR year, the JIF divides the citations received that year by items from the two preceding years by the number of citable items (articles and reviews) published in those two years. Editorials, letters and news items can attract citations that count in the numerator while not counting in the denominator, which is why article-type mix matters. Because only two years of publication count, speed from acceptance to online publication directly affects how much citation time an article gets inside the window.
Other metrics you will be asked about
Elsevier’s CiteScore divides citations over a four-year window by the documents published in that window and is calculated for Scopus-indexed titles. Scopus also reports SNIP and SJR, which adjust for field citation behaviour and citing-journal weight. Clarivate reports a five-year JIF, the Immediacy Index, Cited Half-Life and the Eigenfactor family alongside the JIF. Each answers a slightly different question, so report more than one when you describe your journal.
Why a single number is a poor target
The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) recommends that journal-level metrics such as the JIF not be used as a surrogate for the quality of individual articles or for hiring, promotion and funding decisions. Many funders and universities have signed it. A sensible journal goal is better, better-discovered research. A higher JIF is a possible consequence, not the plan.
Nine practices that can raise citations
1. Hold a consistent quality bar
Write reviewer guidelines that state what a useful report contains, use a structured decision form so editors judge manuscripts on the same criteria, and desk-reject out-of-scope work early rather than sending it to reviewers. A shorter, more selective issue usually outperforms a longer, uneven one.
2. Shorten the path from acceptance to online
Only citations received after publication count, and the JIF window is two years. Publish accepted articles online as soon as they are ready (continuous publication or an online-first stage) instead of waiting for an issue to fill, and report your time to first decision and time to publication so authors can see them.
3. Make the journal easy to find and read
Deposit metadata with Crossref, give every article a DOI, and make sure titles, abstracts and keywords are accurate so search engines and indexing services can match your articles to the right readers. Open access can widen readership. Studies of an open access citation advantage give mixed results once self-selection is controlled for, so treat it as a reach and compliance benefit rather than a guaranteed citation lift. Check funder rules such as Plan S when you set your access model.
4. Promote published articles, honestly
Ask authors to share their paper through their institution, society and professional networks, and post plain-language summaries from the journal’s own channels. Attention can bring readers; it does not replace research that other researchers want to cite, so do not treat social reach as a citation forecast.
5. Build an editorial board that brings readers and authors
Appoint board members for activity and field standing, define roles and terms, and review the board every year. Board members who actually handle manuscripts, recruit reviewers and invite submissions raise quality and visibility. Names on a masthead who never act do not.
6. Use special issues with care
A focused special issue on a topic the community is working on can bring in new authors and readers. Appoint guest editors through your board, apply the same peer review standard as for regular issues, and monitor outcomes. Special issues handled loosely are a common cause of integrity problems, so write the safeguards before you publish the call.
7. Widen the author base
Invite work from groups and regions that already study your subject, provide clear author instructions and, where useful, language guidance. Indexing evaluators look at the diversity of authors and editors, and a wider author base brings a wider reader base.
8. Commission review articles and consider the article-type mix
Review articles are, in many fields, cited more often than primary research. A small number of invited, rigorously reviewed reviews from recognised researchers can give readers an entry point to your journal. Be aware of the denominator: reviews count as citable items, while editorials and letters typically do not, but do not publish or relabel content only to influence the ratio. Clarivate can adjust how it classifies items.
9. Measure what you control
Track submissions by region and type, in-scope rate, time to decision, time to publication, reviewer response rates and citations to your own articles by year. These show whether a change is working long before the next JCR release. Compare against journals in the same JCR category, not against the whole list.
What not to do
Do not require authors to cite the journal as a condition of acceptance, pool citations with other journals, or publish content solely to attract self-citations. Clarivate monitors journal self-citation and citation stacking and can suppress a journal from the JCR, so a short-term gain risks losing the metric entirely. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) treats citation manipulation as a publication ethics matter that editors should document and act on. Keep editorial decisions independent of what a paper is expected to be cited.
What to expect
There is no standard timeline. A new journal first needs to be selected for Web of Science, which Clarivate decides against its published criteria, and then needs enough time for its own articles to be cited. Typical JIF values vary by an order of magnitude between fields, so a figure that is ordinary in one subject category is exceptional in another. Set goals relative to the category quartile rather than to an absolute number, and review them at each JCR release.
NeucitePress services for journal editors
Three services that support the practices above. Inclusion in any database and any citation outcome are decided by others and are never promised.
A twelve-month program: scope repositioning, international outreach, calls for papers, special-issue design and an author services desk, with quarterly reporting on submissions.
Journal-specific policies aligned with COPE and ICMJE, editorial board renewal, integrity screening, an ethics case retainer, training and an annual compliance review.
A 4-hour live virtual workshop for up to 15 editors, board members and reviewers, built on COPE Core Practices, with a 1-hour follow-up Q&A.
Sources
- Clarivate, Journal Citation Reports: metrics, JIF calculation and journal suppression policy
- Clarivate, Web of Science Core Collection editorial selection process
- Elsevier, CiteScore methodology
- San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)
- COPE, Citation manipulation discussion document
- cOAlition S, Plan S
