Ukrainian Arheologia: Scientometric Analysis

In the paper the implementation of the newly established methodological scheme for scientometric and bibliometric analysis of scientific periodicals is presented. This methodology is applied to the Arheologia journal, the leading scientific Ukrainian archaeological journal. The study aims to obtain a “portrait” of the journal, characterise its development and change, determine worrying issues, and suggest potential growth directions. We applied the methods of scientometric, bibliometric, lexicological, and semantic studies, as well as a few statistical tools. By calculating the Herfindahl — Hirschman index (HHI), we estimated the journal’s monopolisation level from 2015 to 2017 and 2021 to 2023. Furthermore, we analysed the list of journal authors based on the metadata of almost 1700 articles and concluded that the features of authors’ contributions and the cooperation patterns correspond to those of humanities and social sciences journals. The list of sections and their change through time was analysed for 1947–2023, as well as the number of papers in the main sections (228 journal issues and more than 3600 papers were studied, for that matter). The word frequency in the paper’s titles has been investigated for the same period. The keywords selection and use patterns were considered from 2009 to 2023 when these were included in the journal’s metadata. Finally, the dataset of papers from 1989 to 2023 was used to evaluate the papers’ titles’ “synthesising capacity.” This parameter is introduced together with the developed methodology of estimating the titles’ capacity to introduce the analytical or synthesising nature of scientific papers. The estimation follows the criteria of creativity, functionality, and engagement. We compared the results for 2019–2023 with the data from the Open Archaeology international journal (published by DeGruyter) for the same period. The studied data prove that improving the journal’s visibility for a broader audience worldwide requires modernising its publishing policies. Structuring the sectioning system and using keywords would also be very beneficial. For instance, all determined growth directions are indirectly connected with Ukraine’s current state of archaeological theory and methodology. The research revealed the traditionality of Arheologia publishing strategies. It underscored the dynamics of the change in its main parameters and allowed the determination of the features of this journal and Ukrainian archaeology in general.