A Comprehensive Review of Google Scholar De-Indexing and Its Implications for Scholarly Publishing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61424/jcsit.v3i2.1017Keywords:
Google Scholar, Article indexing, Scopus Journals, Web of Science, DOAJAbstract
Google Scholar has become an important discovery platform for scholarly literature, making the visibility and accessibility of journal articles closely connected to effective indexing. This review examines Google Scholar de-indexing, focusing on its underlying causes, observable indicators, consequences for scholarly publishing, diagnostic approaches, and potential recovery strategies. Drawing on Google Scholar’s publisher and webmaster guidance, the review identifies technical and metadata-related problems, crawling restrictions, inaccessible or poorly structured article pages, incorrect bibliographic information, website instability, and changes in article availability as major factors that can contribute to incomplete indexing or the removal of previously discoverable content. The review further shows that apparent de-indexing should be distinguished from temporary indexing gaps, delayed updates, duplicate consolidation, citation-record changes, and search-result fluctuations. De-indexing can reduce article discoverability, citation opportunities, journal visibility, author impact, and the perceived credibility of scholarly publications. Google Scholar itself notes that indexing coverage is not guaranteed to remain uninterrupted and that technical problems affecting crawling, processing, or website availability can result in content being removed from search results. The review therefore emphasizes systematic diagnosis through title-level searches, examination of article URLs and metadata, verification of crawler accessibility, and assessment of website and content compliance with Google Scholar’s inclusion requirements. Recovery requires coordinated technical and editorial interventions, including improving metadata quality, ensuring stable and crawlable article URLs, maintaining accessible abstracts and full texts, correcting website configuration, and monitoring indexing over time. Overall, the review argues that Google Scholar de-indexing is not merely a search-visibility problem but a significant scholarly communication issue requiring continuous technical, editorial, and quality-control practices to sustain the discoverability and impact of academic journals.
References
Ananny, M. (2016). Toward an ethics of algorithms: Convening, observation, probability, and timeliness. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 93-117.
Aniwa S.C. (2021). Impact of Supply Chain Integration on Operational Performance: Insights from Manufacturing Firms in Emerging Economies. Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, 5(4).
Babaoglu, E. (2021). The right to be forgotten in canada. Intellectual Property Journal, 33(3), 303-331.
Berman, P. S. (2018). Legal Jurisdiction and the deterritorialization of data. Vand. L. Rev. En Banc, 71, 11.
Bhattacharjee, M., Kaposy, C., Grossman, M. R., & Marshall, Z. (2023). Patient photographs on Google Images: a commentary on informed consent, copyright, and privacy laws. Law, Innovation and Technology, 15(2), 536-557.
Bloch-Wehba, H. (2019). Global platform governance: private power in the shadow of the state. SMu l. reV., 72, 27.
Colangelo, G. (2022). Enforcing copyright through antitrust? The strange case of news publishers against digital platforms. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 10(1), 133-161.
Cortegiani, A., Ippolito, M., Ingoglia, G., Manca, A., Cugusi, L., Severin, A., ... & Giarratano, A. (2020). Citations and metrics of journals discontinued from Scopus for publication concerns: the GhoS (t) copus Project. F1000Research, 9, 415.
Cortegiani, A., Ippolito, M., Ingoglia, G., Manca, A., Cugusi, L., Severin, A., ... & Giarratano, A. (2020). Scopus for publication concerns: the GhoS (t) copus Project.
Frosio, G. F. (2016). The right to be forgotten: much ado about nothing. Colo. Tech. LJ, 15, 307.
Ginsberg, J. (2016). Global View: Europe’s right-to-be-forgotten law pushed to new extremes after a Belgian court rules that individuals can force newspapers to edit archive articles. Index on Censorship, 45(3), 60-61.
Giray, L. (2025). Hidden prompts in manuscripts threaten the integrity of peer review and research: recommendations for journals and institutions. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 53(10), 2385-2388.
Islam, A., & Jantan, A. H. B. (2023). The mediation effect of affective organizational commitment on the relationship between HRM practices and turnover intention in the RMG industry. Research Journal in Business and Economics, 1(1), 24-38.
Islam, A., Jantan, A. H. B., Khalifa, G. S., Islam, A., Islam, B., & Hossian, A. (2023). Effects of Decision Making and Work-life Balance on Productivity of Female Employees in the RMG Industry of Bangladesh. The Mediating Role of Work Motivation. Research Journal in Business and Economics, 1(1), 48-59.
Islam, M. A., & Sinniah, S. (2025). Exploring customer relationship management factors, customer trust, and innovation capacity: A quantitative study on customer retention. Accountancy Business and the Public Interest, 41(10), 12-29.
Islam, M. A., Islam, M. A., Amin, M. B., Hossain, M. M., Hassan, M. S., Afrin, S., & Oláh, J. (2025). Enhancing academic's performance: Exploring the interaction of innovative work behavior, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy in public universities. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 102210.
Khatri, S., & Fatma, T. (2023). Second Chances and Digital Erasure: Do Former Convicts Have the Right to Be" Forgotten" in India?. CALJ, 8, vii.
Kim, E., Atteraya, M., & Gnawali, S. (2025). Temporal characteristics of journals indexed in both KCI and Scopus: analyzing journal age, coverage and journal metrics. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication.
Messina, D. (2025). The Right to Be Forgotten. An Introduction to Digital Data Law in the EU, 20.
Mira, B. S. D., Oliveira, C. G. D., & Shintaku, M. (2022). [RETRACTED ARTICLE] Editorial path and the visibility of scientific publications: an exploratory case study on the journal Tchê Química. RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, 20, e022011.
Nunziato, D. C. (2017). The fourth year of forgetting: The troubling expansion of the right to be forgotten. U. Pa. J. Int'l L., 39, 1011.
Ozbek, L., Abdel-Rahman, S. M., Unlu, S., Guldan, M., Copur, S., Burlacu, A., ... & Kanbay, M. (2024). Exploring adiposity and chronic kidney disease: clinical implications, management strategies, prognostic considerations. Medicina, 60(10), 1668.
Pandita, R., & Singh, S. (2023). Compromising quality parameters lead to fallout: a study of de-indexing of research journals. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 28(2), 29-45.
Paolucci, F. (2024). Due Process of Artificial Intelligence: a Challenge for the Protection of Fundamental Rights. Available at SSRN 4936189.
Pushka, J. (2019). The applicability of the personal information protection and electronic documents act to de-indexing internet search engine results. Asper Rev. Int'l Bus. & Trade L., 19, 175.
Savegnago de Mira, B., Gomes de Oliveira, C., & Shintaku, M. (2022). Editorial path and the visibility of scientific publications: an exploratory case study on the journal Tchê Química. RDBCI: Digital Journal of Library & Information Science/Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, 20, 1.
Sharma, J. (2025). Freedom of the Press in the Shadow of Privacy: The Right to be Forgotten in India, EU, and USA. LawFoyer Int'l J. Doctrinal Legal Rsch., 3, 149.
Singer, P. (2025). Confronting the inevitable: Harnessing technology to contain systemic scientific fraud. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(44), e2521606122.
Singh, M. M., & Malik, V. (2026). Balancing Digital Privacy and Freedom of Information: The Right to Be Forgotten Across Three Jurisdictions. Journal of Digital Justice and Legal Innovation, 1(1), 50-58.
Singson, M., Manavalan, L., & Thiyagarajan, S. (2025). Analysing the impact of academic policies and interventions on research productivity in Indian library and information science. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 26(1), 17-33.
Stainforth, E. (2022). Collective memory or the right to be forgotten? Cultures of digital memory and forgetting in the European Union. Memory Studies, 15(2), 257-270.
Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Nazarovets, S. (2023). Can the principle of the ‘right to be forgotten’be applied to academic publishing? Probe from the perspective of personal rights, archival science, open science and post‐publication peer review. Learned Publishing, 36(4), 651-666.
Ziccardi, G. (2019). The right to data oblivion. In Data Politics (pp. 231-247). Routledge.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Elijah Kokonya Nabwire
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
