If your research sits between two fields — technology and policy, psychology and economics, medicine and sociology — you've probably felt the friction of journal selection. Discipline-specific journals see your paper as out-of-scope; general journals see it as too niche. The space between is where interdisciplinary work lives, and it's also where many strong papers die without publication. This guide maps the interdisciplinary Scopus journals that actually welcome cross-domain research, explains how to tell the genuine ones from the merely ambitious, and shows you how to position your paper so it lands.
Why "Interdisciplinary" Is a Loaded Word on Journal Pages
Most journals claim to welcome interdisciplinary work in their Aims & Scope. Very few actually publish it. A close read of recent issues usually reveals that a journal's "interdisciplinary" commitment translates to publishing occasional papers that span two closely related subfields within the same broader domain. Genuinely cross-domain work — the kind that draws on fundamentally different epistemologies or methodological traditions — is much rarer, even at journals that advertise openness.
This gap between stated and actual practice is where most interdisciplinary rejections happen. Authors submit in good faith, assuming their cross-domain paper fits because the scope page says it does. Reviewers then apply their discipline-specific standards, finding the paper "underdeveloped" in whichever field they represent. The outcome is predictable and frustrating.
What Makes a Journal Genuinely Interdisciplinary
Before trusting any journal's interdisciplinary claim, check for these six signals. Together, they separate journals where cross-domain work succeeds from those where it lingers in review.
Editorial board drawn from multiple disciplines
Look at the board. If every member holds a PhD in the same field, the journal is monodisciplinary in practice — whatever its scope says.
Recent issues visibly span fields
In the last 20 articles, count how many clearly draw on two or more disciplines. If fewer than five, the journal is not meaningfully interdisciplinary.
Methodological diversity in published work
Journals genuinely open to cross-domain research typically publish quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods work — not just one tradition.
Explicit submission guidance for interdisciplinary authors
Some journals now ask authors to explain their cross-domain contribution explicitly. That's a sign the editorial process is designed for this kind of work.
Review process that pairs reviewers from both fields
When editorial policies mention "seeking reviewers across disciplines" — or you can see it in acknowledgements — the journal has infrastructure for cross-domain review.
Indexed in multiple subject categories
Scopus and WoS assign each journal to subject categories. Journals listed under multiple categories are usually more interdisciplinary in practice.
An Aims & Scope page can claim anything. Editorial board composition, reviewer pools, and the last 20 articles cannot lie.
Interdisciplinary Scopus Journals Worth Considering
These are journals where cross-domain work is genuinely published, not merely tolerated. Quartile and indexing status should always be verified before submitting — these can shift quarterly. Group them by the kind of intersection your work sits in.
PLOS ONE
Heliyon
Scientific Reports
Sustainability
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Nature Human Behaviour
SAGE Open
Which Cross-Domain Shape Does Your Paper Have?
Interdisciplinary papers come in several shapes, and each has a natural home. Knowing which shape describes your work helps you narrow the search before a single journal is opened.
| Cross-domain shape | What the paper does | Natural home |
|---|---|---|
| Methodology transfer | Applies a method from field A to a question in field B | Field B journal open to new methods |
| Problem synthesis | Reframes a problem using insights from both fields | True interdisciplinary journal |
| Theory bridge | Connects theories from two traditions to explain phenomenon | Conceptual/theoretical-friendly journal |
| Empirical intersection | Data where two disciplines intersect (e.g. bioinformatics) | Domain-specific cross-field journal |
| Policy–research | Combines empirical research with policy analysis | Policy-adjacent interdisciplinary journal |
How to Position an Interdisciplinary Paper
Positioning matters more in interdisciplinary work than almost anywhere else. Reviewers typically come from one of your two fields, and they will read your paper through that lens. Three framing moves help reviewers see cross-domain value rather than discipline-specific gaps:
Lead with the intersection, not the disciplines
Your introduction should open on the problem at the intersection of the fields, not on a review of either field individually. This signals to reviewers that the cross-domain framing is the contribution — not a compromise.
Cite from both fields in the first five references
Reviewers scan opening references as a fluency signal. Citing foundational work from both fields early tells reviewers in either discipline that you know their literature, lowering their suspicion of amateurism in the unfamiliar half.
Name your methodology explicitly
Interdisciplinary work often combines methods from different traditions. Name the design (explanatory sequential mixed methods, comparative case study, bibliometric-network hybrid, etc.) and reference an authoritative source. This defuses the "what kind of study is this?" confusion that derails cross-domain papers.
A paper that reviewers from field A see as "not really about A" and reviewers from field B see as "not really about B" is heading for desk rejection everywhere. Clear framing toward a cross-domain audience is the only defence.
When a General Multidisciplinary Journal Is Better Than an Interdisciplinary One
Sometimes the right home for cross-domain work isn't an interdisciplinary journal at all — it's a broad multidisciplinary journal like PLOS ONE, Heliyon, or Scientific Reports. These journals evaluate methodology soundness rather than disciplinary novelty, so cross-domain work that would trigger scope-fit concerns elsewhere lands cleanly. The trade-off is prestige: general multidisciplinary journals are often mid-quartile rather than elite. Whether that trade works depends on your career stage and goals. See our guide on Q1 vs Q3 targeting for the broader framework.
Shortlist two interdisciplinary journals (primary target) and one multidisciplinary journal (safe backup). If the interdisciplinary review process is slow or messy, the multidisciplinary fallback still gets your work published in a reasonable timeframe.
Integration With Your Shortlist
Journal selection for interdisciplinary work should be built on the same foundation as any other paper — scope fit, methodology fit, quartile, review speed — but with one additional filter: does the journal genuinely publish cross-domain work, not just claim to? Apply that filter early and you'll save yourself months of avoidable desk rejections. For the full framework, see our journal shortlist guide, and for the companion piece on reading what journals actually publish, read our guide to journal scope.
The Bottom Line
Interdisciplinary research is harder to place than discipline-specific work — but not impossible. The journals listed here publish cross-domain papers regularly, and the framing strategies above turn reviewer scepticism into acceptance. The key move is simple: trust what journals publish, not what they claim. Read the last 20 articles, check the editorial board, and let the evidence guide your shortlist.
Find cross-domain journals that match your paper
The AI Journal Finder surfaces interdisciplinary Scopus journals where your specific cross-domain shape has real precedent — not just scope claims.
Try Journal Finder →