Scientific Authority Indicators in Sport Management Journals: A Comparative Analysis with International Standards

Abstract

The present study aimed to examine scientific authority indicators in Iranian sport management journals and compare them with international standards. A mixed-method design was employed. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 experts in scholarly publishing and sport management. Thematic analysis identified three core dimensions influencing scientific authority: content quality, structural quality, and developmental strategies. In the quantitative phase, seven bibliometric indicators—impact factor, H-index, total citations, cited half-life, acceptance rate, international collaboration, and indexing status—were analyzed across 13 Iranian and 11 international sport management journals. Independent t-tests were used to compare groups. Results revealed significant differences in impact factor (0.48 vs. 2.70, p < .01), H-index (8.5 vs. 56.8, p < .01), and acceptance rate (30.7% vs. 20.9%, p < .05), indicating a performance gap. Differences in cited half-life and international collaboration were not statistically significant. Findings suggest that while Iranian journals demonstrate growth in publication volume, structural and citation-based authority indicators remain comparatively lower. Policy recommendations include strengthening peer-review rigor, improving internationalization strategies, enhancing English-language publishing, and aligning evaluation practices with international frameworks such as DORA and the Leiden Manifesto. This study provides evidence-based guidance for improving the global visibility and scientific authority of sport management journals.