Abstract Currently, a broad set of bibliometric indices for evaluation of journal quality, the level of its internationalization, and interactions between serials are available. However, some cases require one to obtain more precise methods to assess journals, e.g., when estimating new journals, selecting them into international citation databases, increasing their rank, broadening their readership, or optimizing editorial policy. To cope with new challenges, new approaches have been introduced including altmetrics and various analyses of editorial board composition and impact. Analyzing altmetrics and studying geographic diversity on editorial boards, comparing these data with that of journal authors, and evaluating research efficiency of editorial board members enables one to use new approaches to assess the rank of serials. This paper considers current research reports on altmetrics, geographic diversity, and publication activity of editorial board members of top journals on Earth Sciences published in the Russian Federation and recognized as international serials. It was found that such altmetrics as abstract views, full text views, and a number of viewed papers are now available as additional metrics to evaluate journal quality. Furthermore, provided that the data on altmetrics are complete, they can be considered as a specific predictor for future citations and other citation-based indices. Editorial board analyses demonstrate a correlation of bibliometric indices of editorial board members with that of a journal. As for geographic diversity, only half of the analyzed journals demonstrate a strong correlation between the number of foreign members on editorial boards and geographic representativeness of a journal, mainly due to the local nature of geosciences and trade secret mode in much of mining research. Generally, the obtained findings highlighted the efficiency of new approaches to evaluate journal quality both in the case of the absence of citation-based journal metrics and as an additional tool to traditional indices.

中文翻译：

---

评估期刊重要性的非传统方法：俄罗斯地球科学期刊的案例研究

摘要 目前，可以使用一套广泛的文献计量指标来评估期刊质量、国际化水平以及连续出版物之间的相互作用。但是，有些情况需要获得更精确的期刊评估方法，例如，在估算新期刊时，将其选入国际引文数据库，提高排名，扩大读者群或优化编辑政策。为了应对新的挑战，引入了新的方法，包括替代度量和对编辑委员会组成和影响的各种分析。分析altmetrics并研究编辑委员会的地理多样性，将这些数据与期刊作者的数据进行比较，并评估编辑委员会成员的研究效率，使人们能够使用新的方法来评估连续出版物的排名。本文考虑了当前在俄罗斯联邦出版并被公认为国际连续出版物的地球科学顶级期刊编辑委员会成员关于替代度量、地理多样性和出版活动的研究报告。研究发现，诸如摘要视图、全文视图和查看论文数量之类的替代指标现在可用作评估期刊质量的附加指标。此外，如果altmetrics 的数据是完整的，它们可以被视为未来引用和其他基于引用的索引的特定预测器。编委会分析证明了编委会成员的文献计量指数与期刊的相关性。至于地理多样性，只有一半的被分析期刊表明，编委的外国成员人数与期刊的地域代表性之间存在很强的相关性，这主要是由于地球科学的本地性质和许多采矿研究中的商业秘密模式。总的来说，获得的研究结果强调了在缺乏基于引文的期刊指标的情况下以及作为传统索引的附加工具来评估期刊质量的新方法的效率。