Protecting Authors from Predatory Journals and Publishers

Al-Khatib, Aceil

doi:10.1007/s12109-016-9474-3

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a consequence, it is very likely that the first author possesses more information about the journals, including the knowledge that the journal might have predatory editorial practices. However, the possibility of being unaware of this fact could nevertheless occur, with a higher probability for less-experienced academics (Xia et al 2015;Al-Khatib 2016). The results from estimating model (1) in a subsample of first authors only are very similar to the results found in Table 2, with small changes in the values of the coefficients.…”

Section: Econometric Resultssupporting

confidence: 66%

“…Regarding the profile of those who publishes in allegedly predatory publisher, there is a presumption in the literature that young and inexperienced academics are the major authors of this kind of outlet (Al-Khatib 2016;Frandsen 2017;Xia et al 2015). Al-Khatib (2016) proposes actions to protect inexperienced authors against predatory journals. Frandsen (2017) studies the characteristics of authors who cite articles published in a selected potentially predatory outlets, showing that they tend to share the same profile of the publishing authors, particularly for being inexperienced authors.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a database of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly openaccess journals, the objective of this research is to study the penetration of predatory publications in the Brazilian academic system and the profile of authors in a cross-section empirical study. Based on a massive amount of publications from Brazilian researchers of all disciplines during the 2000-2015 period, we were able to analyze the extent of predatory publications using an econometric modeling. Descriptive statistics indicate that predatory publications represent a small overall proportion, but grew exponentially in the last 5 years. Departing from prior studies, our analysis shows that experienced researchers with a high number of non-indexed publications and PhD obtained locally are more likely to publish in predatory journals. Further analysis shows that once a journal regarded as predatory is listed in the local ranking system, the Qualis, it starts to receive more publications than non-predatory ones.

show abstract

Section: Econometric Resultssupporting

confidence: 66%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many OA journals are reputable (Wallace & Perri, 2018;Yucha, 2015), but lamentably, some questionable publishers have produced counterfeit journals to exploit OA publishing where the author has to pay. Al-Khatib (2016) asserted that the sole purpose of such bogus journals is collecting article processing charges (APC). Predatory journals are considered a huge challenge within academic research and publication and are feared to corrupt research communication.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These sham journals mislead authors by using aggressive marketing and sending spam emails, and the main victims duped by them are institutions and researchers from lowand middle-income countries (Clark & Smith, 2015). Although such publishers and journals pose the highest risk to inexperienced scholars (Al-Khatib, 2016;Clark & Smith, 2015;Frandsen, 2017), even experienced scholars can be duped into submitting or citing them (Taylor, 2019;Xia et al, 2014) or even accepting positions on their editorial boards (Beall, 2013) and then find it impossible to resign and get their names removed. Fraudulent publishers usually misrepresent their own locations or do not disclose them, and although there is some evidence that many of them are in Asia or Africa, they often claim to be based in Anglophone countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The proliferation of predatory or bogus journals has been recognized as a threat to academic research, and this study was conducted to discover the experiences of authors published in these journals. Eighty authors who had published in journals identified as predatory were surveyed. We asked how the authors learnt about these journals, what they thought about the reputation of the journals, their experiences of peer review and the quality of feedback provided, and whether publication was driven by PhD or job requirements. Our results showed that a third of authors discovered the journals by web searches or responding to email invitations. Over half said the reputation and name of the journal were important in selecting a journal, although a third admitted that the journal they published in did not have a good reputation. The main reason for selecting the journals was the promise of fast publication (31.2% respondents). Only half of the respondents said that publication was driven by PhD or job requirements. Just over a third reported that peer review was good or excellent, and only 17.5% said that peer review was poor or non‐existent – over 70% thought they had received good feedback from the journals. Although the research was somewhat limited, it does indicate general satisfaction with the journals in which the authors published. Fast publication coupled with good feedback and encouragement to submit can make publishing in predatory journals so tempting that few authors can resist.

show abstract

“…Concern has been expressed about some of Beall's criteria and about some of his judgements (e.g. Al‐Khatib, ; Berger & Cirasella, ). Other lists have been developed, such as DOAJ (http://doaj.org), and Cabells () maintains black‐ and/or whitelists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How can a questionable journal be identified: Frameworks and checklists

Frandsen

2019

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questionable journals represent an increasing problem in scholarly communication. The warnings about such journals are plentiful, but the methods used to identify them vary a great deal and make it difficult to accurately determine which journals are fraudulent or simply of low quality. This article presents an overview of the existing frameworks for identifying questionable journals and discussions around them. Most of the frameworks rely on describing the journals under investigation according to a set of criteria, and some can even be turned into a metric or mechanism. The development of frameworks for identifying questionable journals has so far been characterized by a great diversity in format, length, and content. Generally, the frameworks come with little information on development, validation, and reliability. The consequences of prolific tool development are discussed, and a recommendation for testing such frameworks is proposed.

show abstract

Protecting Authors from Predatory Journals and Publishers

Cited by 30 publications

References 11 publications

Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study

Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study

Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives

How can a questionable journal be identified: Frameworks and checklists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About