Nature Communications SJR and Scopus Metrics: What the Numbers Actually Tell Authors
Nature Communications has a strong multidisciplinary Scopus profile, but the real submission question is whether your paper is broad and complete enough for a high-end cross-field journal.
Research Scientist, Neuroscience & Cell Biology
Author context
Works across neuroscience and cell biology, with direct expertise in preparing manuscripts for PNAS, Nature Neuroscience, Neuron, eLife, and Nature Communications.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Quick answer: Nature Communications has a strong multidisciplinary Scopus profile. Nature's official metrics page reports a 2024 SJR of 4.761 and a SNIP of 3.150, while the journal's impact factor is 15.7. That confirms real cross-field influence, but the submission decision still depends more on whether your paper is broad and complete enough than on the metric alone.
The core metric picture
Metric | 2024 value | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|
SJR | 4.761 | Prestige-weighted influence is strong for a broad OA journal |
SNIP | 3.150 | Field-normalized impact remains high |
JCR impact factor | 15.7 | Short-window citation strength is also substantial |
Five-year impact factor | 17.2 | Influence holds up beyond the two-year window |
Editorial model | Broad specialist open access | The journal rewards importance across specialist communities, not just one niche |
The useful reading is that Nature Communications is not just visible. It has a real upper-tier citation profile for a broad-scope journal.
What the metrics actually help with
They help answer the right calibration question:
- does the journal still look strong once you move beyond brand?
- does the open-access scale dilute its standing?
- is it still a serious high-end broad-scope venue?
The answer is yes. The metrics confirm that Nature Communications is a real high-end journal, not just a Nature Portfolio overflow lane.
What the metrics do not answer
They do not tell you:
- whether the paper is broad enough
- whether the story matters beyond one specialist lane
- whether the manuscript is complete enough for a hard editorial screen
- whether the team is using the journal as a prestige fallback rather than a fit-based target
Those are still the real submission questions.
Why the profile matters for authors
At this SJR level, Nature Communications is buying authors:
- strong cross-field discoverability
- a journal that serious specialists still read
- open-access visibility without weak-journal signaling
- a broad-scope room for papers that are bigger than one niche, but not truly general-science papers
That is why the profile matters. The journal has real prestige, but it is prestige attached to a specific product: broad specialist significance rather than the extreme scarcity of Nature.
What should drive the submission decision instead
The better question is whether the manuscript is truly a Nature Communications paper.
That is why the better next reads are:
- Is Nature Communications a good journal?
- Nature Communications submission guide
- Nature Communications submission process
- Nature Communications acceptance rate
If the paper is broad, polished, and important across a specialist boundary, the metrics support the choice. If it is mostly a strong subfield paper, the same metrics are just explaining why the screen will stay unforgiving.
Practical verdict
Nature Communications has a genuinely strong Scopus-style profile, and that is useful to know. It confirms that the journal remains a serious high-end broad-scope destination.
But the useful takeaway is still fit, not brand comfort. If the manuscript is not broad or complete enough, the metrics do not help. A free Manusights scan is the fastest way to pressure-test that before submission.
- Nature Communications submission guide, Manusights.
Sources
- 1. Nature Communications journal metrics, Nature Portfolio.
- 2. Nature Communications journal page, Nature Portfolio.
- 3. Nature Communications author instructions, Nature Portfolio.
Reference library
Use the core publishing datasets alongside this guide
This article answers one part of the publishing decision. The reference library covers the recurring questions that usually come next: how selective journals are, how long review takes, and what the submission requirements look like across journals.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Dataset / benchmark
Biomedical Journal Acceptance Rates
A field-organized acceptance-rate guide that works as a neutral benchmark when authors are deciding how selective to target.
Reference table
Journal Submission Specs
A high-utility submission table covering word limits, figure caps, reference limits, and formatting expectations.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
- Nature Communications Submission Guide
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Nature Communications (2026)
- Is Nature Communications a Good Journal? Fit Verdict
- Nature Communications Pre-Submission Checklist: Is Your Paper Ready?
- Nature vs Nature Communications: Which Should You Submit To?
- Nature Communications Acceptance Rate 2026: How Selective Is It?
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.