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

Abstract

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.

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

“…Previous studies of the works that cite predatory journals show that these journals often cater to the needs of authors and readers in developing countries. The citing works are generally written by less experienced authors and appear in less prestigious outlets (Frandsen, 2017;Kulczycki et al, 2021;Moussa, 2021c).…”

“…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.…”

“…There is another perspective, however. Several authors have argued that citations to the papers in Beall's List journals are downright harmful-that these citations reveal the extent to which the scholarly literature has been contaminated by low-quality research, flawed methods, and potentially false results (Anderson, 2019;Akça and Akbulut, 2021;Frandsen, 2017;Moussa, 2021bMoussa, , 2021cNelson and Huffman, 2015). From this second perspective, the more highly cited Beall's List journals are a danger because they have been successful at claiming legitimacy for papers that may be inaccurate, biased, or otherwise misleading.…”

“…Frandsen's results are not stratified by subject area, however, so it is possible that Beall's List authors and citers simply publish disproportionately in fields or subfields with low publication and citation rates. Moussa (2021c) evaluated the citations to four predatory marketing journals that appeared in 68 non-predatory journals listed in the 2018 Guide of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). He found that the relative number of citations to the predatory journals was unrelated to the age or citation impact of the citing journal but weakly related to the subjective journal rating assigned by CABS.…”

“…Moussa (2021c) evaluated the citations to four predatory marketing journals that appeared in 68 non-predatory journals listed in the 2018 Guide of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). He found that the relative number of citations to the predatory journals was unrelated to the age or citation impact of the citing journal but weakly related to the subjective journal rating assigned by CABS.…”