Strategic Journal Tier Selection for Literature Reviews: A Bibliometric Analysis Using Topic Modeling and Diversity Metrics

Abstract Journal ranking systems classify outlets into tiers, yet there is limited empirical guidance on how these tiers should be used when designing a literature search. This study examines whether journal tiers differ in the kinds of themes they emphasize and whether expanding a search from higher- to lower-tier outlets yields meaningful gains in topical coverage. Using a bibliometric workflow that combines topic modeling with a diversity-based assessment confirmable through resampling and cross-checking across ranking schemes, we compare thematic concentration and topical breadth across progressively inclusive tier combinations. The results indicate that higher-tier outlets tend to emphasize a more focused set of themes, whereas adding mid-tier outlets expands topical coverage by introducing additional implementation-oriented and contextual themes. In contrast, extending the search to the lowest tier yields little additional thematic coverage, suggesting a saturation point. We translate these findings into practical guidance for review design: depth-oriented reviews can prioritize higher-tier outlets, whereas breadth-oriented reviews benefit from including mid-tier journals, with limited value from extending to the lowest tier when resources are constrained.