Beall's legacy in the battle against predatory publishers

Abstract

Between 2009 and 2012, Jeffrey Beall published four articles which analysed 18 publishers (17 of which he identified as predatory). He also introduced the term predatory in the context of scientific publishing. In 2012, he started Beall's List, which maintained a list of predatory publishers and journals. This became a valuable resource for those who wanted to know if a journal was legitimate, although others were very critical of the list. This article considers what he wrote and the list he developed and the criticisms that have been levelled against Beall's list. Beall's legacy can be considered to ensure that the problems of fraudulent or inappropriate publishing practices are highlighted and that the scientific community remains aware of the problem. Unfortunately, his legacy has not led to an eradication of predatory journals, and the problem appears to have become worse in the past decade. Although there is opportunity to build on his legacy, there have been few practical moves, and this article suggests that there is an opportunity for clearer, more universally accepted guidelines and approval criteria for quality journals.

A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers

“…These cases highlight, however, the real reputational risks associated with the term “predatory” when describing a journal or publisher. It also indicates the continued use of flawed blacklists that fuel hyperbolic language and comparisons that make an understanding of the phenomenon of “predatory” publishing more difficult to interpret (Kendall, 2021 ). Where does one draw the line between some / many predatory characteristics and some / many exploitative characteristics (Teixeira da Silva et al, 2019b )?…”

Scientific publications – the bad, the good, for a fistful of dollars

“…Важно подчеркнуть, что принципы опубликования и оценки научных работ значительно изменились после появления журналов, берущих с авторов плату за публикацию (Article Processing Charge -APC), среди которых в настоящее время огромное количество так называемых журналов-«хищников» [20][21][22][23][24]. Такие журналы заинтересованы главным образом в привлечении как можно бóльших средств от авторов, при этом то, ЧТО публикуется, их волнует гораздо меньше.…”

Open Access, Research Communities, and a Defense Against Predatory Journals

“…I thought that by listing the predatory publishers and journals I could help researchers avoid becoming victimized by them, for most predatory journals are counterfeit journals, pretending to carry out an honest peer review process but instead only seeking to earn income quickly and easily from researchers by providing fast and easy publishing without a bona fide peer review [1]. I also gave presentations at conferences and meetings around the world -including one in Central Asia (see Figure 1) -and published about 40 articles on the topic of predatory publishing [2]. Now I am retired and have had some time to consider what I gathered from my experiences with predatory journals, and in this opinion article, I would like to share some of what I learned.…”