Recent debates on research evaluation in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) have underscored the limitations of traditional bibliometric databases – such as Scopus and Web of Science – in capturing the linguistic and regional diversity characteristic of these fields. This study presents the first large-scale comparison between OpenAlex and Scopus, based on the journal classification system of Italy’s National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR). Using a data set of 23,304 classified journals, we compare the two databases in terms of coverage, language diversity, journal quality, and overlap. Our results show that OpenAlex indexes a substantially higher proportion of journals (66.9% vs 48.2%), includes more top-tier journals (81.9% vs 68.5%), and offers broader language inclusivity – particularly for French, Spanish, and German publications. However, unlike Scopus, OpenAlex does not apply editorial quality control mechanisms. We conclude by discussing the trade-offs between coverage and selectivity, and offer practical implications for the use of bibliometric data in SSH research assessment.
Cicero et al. (2026) studied this question.