The assessment of scientific journals for the Qualis database has deep effects on the scientific community and raises questions on the evaluation method. A meta-analysis of this assessment of psychological journals is provided. Scientific editors of psychology journals (38 editors answered questionnaires applied by e-mail), librarians familiar with scientific journals assessment procedures (5 participants, semi-structured interviews) and referees of the CAPES/ANPEPP Commission (7 participants, open questions sent by e-mail) were consulted. The most important points include disagreement among different subjects involved on the suitability of such evaluation model to assess the editorial situation in Psychology and on adopted criteria; acknowledgement of improvements in scientific journals; the model fails to assess the journal's quality. Since the assessment process is important to scientific progress, alternatives should be found to satisfy demands posited by the scientific community.
Psychology scientific journals; journals assessment; Qualis database
