I think we should not bother about this but try to exchange our knowledge and good thoughts by any way (publication is one the media)..

Victor - 

I haven't heard of Citescore, but if, like the impact factor, it is an indirect attempt at measuring popularity, I still do not see any such measure as a way of very accurately describing the value of a journal, and even less so for an individual paper.  And value to whom?  For what? 

As a quantitative statistician, I think it often helpful to measure data parameters.  But you have to consider what you are measuring and make sense of what you do.  Well-defined statistics which do not blur topics and confound understanding of an issue are important.  Otherwise you just do something misleading.  Statistics should be used to clarify, not mislead.   I do not see one number as being able to capture the value of a journal or paper. 

Cheers - Jim 

I think we should not bother about this but try to exchange our knowledge and good thoughts by any way (publication is one the media)..

Hi,

The cite score is a collection of Elsevier's measures, not just an impact factor. The Cite score that is an impact factor differs from the World of science impact factor in the number of years considered for the calculation, the IF has two years window and the Cite score considers 3 publication years. Otherwise the two are measuring scientific publications data, the IF is used on a more selective data set than the Cite score. A researcher could choose between the two and get nice results using either one of the two.

In fact, the information in scientific and technological journals is much more important than the score. When I am looking for information, I do not pay attention in the journal metric as well as in the h metrics evaluating the researcher.

In as much as the said citescore is originated by Elsevier, I will personally welcome it based on integrity.

citescore maybe subjective. irrespective of the originator. I think some unpopular fields or articles might have some citations more than other with high value based on who is working in that area. thus this might be misleading.

The link below is for you guys who are interested in CiteScore:

https://journalmetrics.scopus.com/

No two metrics can be substituted for each other.I believe Metrics are mere numbers which cant measure your hard work. Still more, at the end of the day the metrics which suit you the most and serves you a sense of satisfaction is good. 

CiteScore is far better than Impact factor. It covers 3 years citation and large quantity of journals . 

Yes our institution accept CiteScore and its a useful metric along with SNIP and Citation per publication. The question of which is good qhich is bad is not relevant. It depends on how you accept and use the metrics. 

Citescore metrics brings much more values nowadays. It is very transparent metrics. Many improvement were done recently.

https://blog.scopus.com/posts/citescore-tracker-keep-current-with-how-a-title-s-citescore-is-building-each-month?utm_campaign=Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017&utm_campaignPK=324179751&utm_term=OP32335&utm_content=364945789&utm_source=71&BID=1055407367&utm_medium=email&SIS_ID=0&dgcid=Newsletters%20%26%20Alerts_email_Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017

https://blog.scopus.com/posts/new-on-scopus-link-to-datasets-search-funding-acknowledgements-and-find-more-citescore?utm_campaign=Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017&utm_campaignPK=324179751&utm_term=OP32335&utm_content=364945789&utm_source=71&BID=1055407367&utm_medium=email&SIS_ID=0&dgcid=Newsletters%20%26%20Alerts_email_Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017

CiteScore is better. It is always stable,  transparent, updated and un- biased as compared to JCR.

Hi,

Citescore is an impact measure that relies on Scopus data and uses the three -years window for calculations and it is different from the two-years window used by the Impact Factor. However, the Impact factor has also the accumulated five-year impact which is more stable. The monthly data on a journal's impact is not very useful since the impact of a journal tends to fluctuate. The more years considered in the calculation, the better.

Article Differences and similarities between Journal Impact Factor a...

https://library.osu.edu/researchcommons/2017/06/12/citescore-vs-impact-factor

The 3 year window is a good compomise and the much higher journal coverage make it very useful.

Interesting question. I think also like other colleagues that Citescore can be used as a measure for Scopus. it can be calculated monthly with its CiteScoreTracker .

No

The citation index does not always represent the impact of the journal. Well, the origin of these citations should be considered, and the variables considered within the impact index of the journal in question.

Research on reduced inequalities (27%)

• Proportion of papers in the top 10 per cent of journals as defined by Citescore (10%)
• Field-weighted citation index of papers produced by the university (10%)
• Number of publications (7%)

This focuses on research that is relevant to reduced inequalities. The field-weighted citation index is a subject-normalised score of the citation performance of publications...

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/impact-rankings-2019-methodology-reduced-inequalities

The following comparison may be helpful

Regards Victor C. Kok

Yes I think that correct

Yes I think that correct

Now, CiteScore has arrived to compete with the Impact Factor, luring users in with these benefits:

• It is free to access on the Scopus Journal Metrics website (JCR is a paid subscription.)
• It is calculated from the Scopus journal list, which is much larger than the Web of Science list and includes more social sciences and humanities journals.
• It provides a 3-year citation window, rather than the 2-year window of the Impact Factor.

(There is also the CiteScore Tracker, where you can watch your journal’s score go up or down on a monthly basis. While this may interest some journal editors, I cannot recommend it for anyone else.)

CiteScore metrics: Creating journal metrics from the Scopus citation index

Most of the CiteScore metrics are static, annual indicators calculated from the dynamic Scopus citation index. In the spirit of recent public statements on the responsible use of metrics, we outline the desirable characteristics of journal citation metrics, discuss how we decided on the cited and citing publications years and document types to be used for CiteScore metrics, and detail the precise method of calculation of each metric. We further discuss CiteScore metrics eligibility criteria and online display choices, as well as our approach to calculating static indicators from the dynamic citation index. Finally, we look at the feedback the metrics have so far received and how CiteScore is already developing in response...

Preprint CiteScore metrics: Creating journal metrics from the Scopus ...

Nice discussion

Read the interesting research article.

Article Differences and similarities between Journal Impact Factor a...

That means Citescore is good....

impact factor itself is given based on the cite score of the journal so i think if cite score of the journal increases obviously the impact factor will so be high, isn,t it? it furthur adds the value to the journal.

Yes I think that correct

interesting question.

Major difference between CiteScore and Journal Impact Factor: CiteScore calculation is based on Scopus data, while Impact Factor is based on Web of Science data. CiteScore uses a 3-year window while Impact Factor adopts a 2-year window.

Powered by Scopus, CiteScore is a comprehensive, current, clear and free set of metrics that support the research community...

https://communications.elsevier.com/nl/jsp/m.jsp?c=%40QEJQ9KnLFG8AMqkcMAx5nr0gUWXuldm3vtgoIPRCJnM%3D&utm_campaign=RN_AGCM_Program_300005245&utm_medium=email&utm_dgroup=RE_SCP_EG_20200609_DL_100001332&utm_acid=322116741&SIS_ID=0&dgcid=RN_AGCM_Program_300005245&CMX_ID=&utm_in=DM700296&utm_source=AC_71&utm_term=SC_CiteScore_June

The major difference between CiteScore and Journal Impact Factor:

• CiteScore calculation is based on Scopus data, while Impact Factor is based on Web of Science data.
• CiteScore uses a 4-year window while Impact Factor adopts a 2-year window.
• CiteScore includes more document types indexed by Scopus, including articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers, and book chapters; while Impact Factor only includes "citable documents" which are articles and reviews.

Hi,

Since the impact of journal tends to fluctuate, the two measures could not be the same, because Cite score is measured with 3 years window, and the impact factor considers two years window for measuring citations' impact. Cite score is used by Elsevier's Scopus, and the impact factor is a measure used by Clarivate Analytics.

While Searching for Journals to submit one of my manuscripts, I encountered that some journals with a Cite score around 2 did not have any impact factor. I was also curious whether Cite score could be used as an evaluation parameter as Impact factor of the Journal.

I agree with Dr. Ljubomir Jacić.