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

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.