Canadian Academics’ use of predatory journals

Abstract

Introduction
 Predatory journals have been acknowledged as an increasing concern in the scholarly literature over the last decade, but research on the subject has been sparse. Research that has focused on predatory journals in the Canadian context has been even rarer, and limited to work focused on a single university. This study explores publishing trends in predatory journals by authors affiliated with Canadian Universities.
 Methods
 Articles published by authors at 30 Canadian universities, including all universities in the U15, were pulled from select predatory journals. Key data including author affiliation, article type, discipline, and grant information were extracted from the articles.
 Results
 All universities in the study were found to have publications in predatory journals. The health sciences accounted for 72% of the publications, and the sciences for 20%. Research articles accounted for 50% of the articles. Opinion, editorial, or commentary pieces accounted for 24% and 19% were review articles. Grant funding was indicated in 34% of the articles, with NSERC and CIHR being top funders. The research-intensive U15 universities were found to publish more in predatory journals than their non-U15 compatriots, even when the universities were of similar size. 
 Discussion
 Canadian scholars were found to publish in predatory journals, particularly those scholars from the health sciences and research-intensive U15 universities. Grant funding was common, and often came from high profile funders like NSERC and CIHR. This exploratory suggests that policy and education initiatives may be warranted in Canadian contexts, especially in the health sciences and at research-intensive universities.

Công Bố Về Chủ Đề “Predatory Journal” Trong Cơ Sở Dữ Liệu Scopus

“…Các đặc điểm của "predatory journal" chưa được mô tả, tiêu chuẩn hóa, cũng như không được chấp nhận rộng rãi. Cũng có một số thuật ngữ khác đã được dùng để biểu thị các "predatory journal" chẳng hạn như "deceptive journals" (tạp chí lừa đảo) [12], "pseudo-journals" (tạp chí giả mạo) [13], "bad faith journals" (tạp chí có tin xấu) [14], "illegitimate journals" (tạp chí bất hợp pháp) [15], "black journal" (tạp chí đen tối/tạp chí đen), "journal in the black list" (tạp chí trong danh sách đen) [16]. Tuy vậy, giống như thuật ngữ "predatory journal" chúng có thể không phản ánh đầy đủ các chất lượng đa dạng hiện có trong bối cảnh xuất bản học thuật và sự khác biệt giữa các tạp chí chất lượng thấp và các tạp chí có uy tín không rõ ràng.…”