Abstract

This paper reviews the Brazilian national system of journal evaluation Qualis Periódicos. It reviews some of the fundamentals of journal evaluation based on citation analysis and inclusion in databases. This paper also discusses the evaluation of journals based on national lists and the characteristics of the Brazilian evaluation system. It analyzes the criteria and examples of the Communication and Information area as well as some of the arguments against the system. It concludes that Qualis Periódicos is too dependent on the opinion of experts and that the development and application criteria are not sufficiently clear. The conclusions point out some possibilities that could be followed in the future to improve the system.