A “Trojan horse” in the reference lists: Citations to a hijacked journal in SSCI-indexed marketing journals

Moussa, Salim

doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102388

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately, the processes by which authors identify, evaluate, and cite relevant papers may be regarded as an indirect means of assessing their quality. While Beall (2015b), Moussa (2021aMoussa ( , 2021c, and others have stated that predatory journals bypass the conventional peer review process and allow "un-vetted" research to enter the scholarly record, the absence of serious peer review actually removes just one component of the vetting process. Research papers are evaluated not just before they are published, but also afterward, when authors decide whether to cite them.…”

Section: Citation Impact Of Predatory Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the works that cite Beall's List accounting journals comparable to those that cite Scopus journals of similar citation impact?

Walters

2022

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTh study evaluates the apparent quality of the 10 Beall's List accounting journals with the highest citation rates by investigating whether the works that cite those journals are comparable to those that cite 11 Scopus journals of similar citation impact.Design/methodology/approachThe study investigates the characteristics of the works that cited the Beall's List and Scopus journals, 2015–2020, comparing the two groups of citing works by publication type (article, book, etc.), extent of self-citation, inclusion in Beall's List and Scopus, Open Access (OA) status, publisher type, citation impact, and country/region of interest.FindingsThe Beall's List accounting journals tend to be cited in less reputable outlets; they are especially likely to be cited in Beall's List journals and especially unlikely to be cited in Scopus journals. However, other evidence suggests that these journals occupy a distinctive niche. The works that cite Beall's List journals are especially likely to be OA, to be published by universities and other nonprofits, and to focus on lower-income countries. They also have relatively low journal and publisher self-citation rates.Originality/valueBeall's List accounting journals may be especially useful to scholars who rely on OA journals, who see their local universities as natural publishing partners, and who investigate topics of concern to developing countries. An increase in the number of non-predatory journals that cater to these authors' needs might help resolve the apparent problem of unmet demand for journal space.

show abstract

Section: Citation Impact Of Predatory Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the works that cite Beall's List accounting journals comparable to those that cite Scopus journals of similar citation impact?

Walters

2022

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stated differently, it is highly likely that articles published in the genuine journal have cited/are citing articles published in the hijacked journal. The recent study by Moussa (2021a) indicates that two articles published in the genuine Journal of Marketing Management in 2019 and 2020 have cited up to nine articles that appeared in the hijacked Journal of Marketing Management. This kind of 'citation infiltration' (Moussa, 2021a) may cast some doubts not solely on the quality of the citing articles but also on the rigour of the peer review process of the legitimate journal, which may, in turn, harm its reputation along with the one of its publisher (in this case Taylor & Francis).…”

Section: The Victimized Genuine Journals and Their Publishersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A hijacked journal may confuse tenure and promotion committee members as it uses the same name (and ISSN) as a reputable and genuine journal (Moussa, 2021a). Imagine the case of two different candidates that have published articles each in a different version of Agrociencia.…”

Section: The Members Of Tenure and Promotion Panelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Journal hijacking: Challenges and potential solutions

Moussa

2021

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key points Hijacked journals mimic the name (and the ISSN) of a reputable journal with the sole purpose of financial exploitation. A hijacked journal is an even more pernicious scam than a predatory journal. Grounded in stakeholder theory, this opinion piece indicates that the hijackers are the sole stakeholder group that benefits from journal hijacking. Hijacked journals will continue to menace scholarly research and publishing unless all stakeholders take specific and coordinated actions against them.

show abstract

“…As previously mentioned (in Subsection 6.5. ), there is one journal that is currently using the same title as the UK-based Journal of Marketing Management (see Moussa, 2021b). Future studies may investigate the case of this and other clone journals.…”

Section: Limitations and Further Research Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contamination by citations: references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature

Moussa¹

2021

SAJM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposePredatory publishing is a growing and global issue infecting all scientific domains. Predatory publishers create counterfeit, not (properly) peer-reviewed journals to exploit the open access (OA) model in which the author pays. The plethora of predatory marketing journals along with the sophisticated deceptive practices of their publishers may create total confusion. One of the many highly likely risks of that bewilderment is when peer-reviewed, prestigious marketing journals cite these pseudo-marketing journals. This phenomenon is called citation contamination. This study aims to investigate the extent of citation contamination in the peer-reviewed marketing literature.Design/methodology/approachUsing Google Scholar as a citation gathering tool, this study investigates references to four predatory marketing journals in 68 peer-reviewed marketing journals listed in the 2018 version of the Academic Journal Guide by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABSs).FindingsResults indicate that 59 of the 68 CABS-ranked peer-reviewed marketing journals were, up to late January 2021, contaminated by at least one of the four sampled predatory journals. Together, these four pseudo-journals received (at least) 605 citations. Findings from nonparametric statistical procedures show that citation contamination occurred irrespective of the age of a journal or its 2019 Journal Impact Factor (JIF). They also point out that citation contamination happened independently from the fact that a journal is recognized by Clarivate Analytics or not.Research limitations/implicationsThis study investigated citations to only four predatory marketing journals in only 68 CABS-listed peer-reviewed marketing journals.Practical implicationsThese findings should sound an alarm to the entire marketing community (including academics and practitioners). To counteract citation contamination, recommendations are provided for researchers, practitioners, journal editors and academic and professional associations.Originality/valueThis study is the first to offer a systematic assessment of references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature.

show abstract

A “Trojan horse” in the reference lists: Citations to a hijacked journal in SSCI-indexed marketing journals

Cited by 11 publications

References 26 publications

Are the works that cite Beall's List accounting journals comparable to those that cite Scopus journals of similar citation impact?

Are the works that cite Beall's List accounting journals comparable to those that cite Scopus journals of similar citation impact?

Journal hijacking: Challenges and potential solutions

Contamination by citations: references to predatory journals in the peer-reviewed marketing literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About