Hijacked Journals: An Emerging Challenge for Scholarly Publishing

Dadkhah, Mehdi; Borchardt, Glenn

doi:10.1093/asj/sjw026

Cited by 42 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature much has been lately written on predatory journals, but not on hijacked journals [5,16,[30][31][32][33]. The intention of those who have dealt with the issue has been to raise awareness among scholars how to recognize and avoid submission of manuscripts to potential, possible, or probable predatory journals and hijacked journals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How to Recognize and Avoid Potential, Possible, or Probable Predatory Open-Access Publishers, Standalone, and Hijacked Journals

Danevska

Спироски

Donev

et al. 2016

Prilozi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and aim:The Internet has enabled an easy method to search through the vast majority of publications and has improved the impact of scholarly journals. However, it can also pose threats to the quality of published articles. New publishers and journals have emerged so-called open-access potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers and journals, and so-called hijacked journals. It was our aim to increase the awareness and warn scholars, especially young researchers, how to recognize these journals and how to avoid submission of their papers to these journals. Methods: Review and critical analysis of the relevant published literature, Internet sources and personal experience, thoughts, and observations of the authors. Results: The web blog of Jeffrey Beall, University of Colorado, was greatly consulted. Jeffrey Beall is a Denver academic librarian who regularly maintains two lists: the first one, of potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers and the second one, of potential, possible, or probable predatory standalone journals. Aspects related to this topic presented by other authors have been discussed as well. Conclusion: Academics should bear in mind how to differentiate between trustworthy and reliable journals and predatory ones, considering: publication ethics, peer-review process, international academic standards, indexing and abstracting, preservation in digital repositories, metrics, sustainability, etc.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of the articles published in these journals will appear in the search results when retrieving literature and will be a source of new medical hypotheses that can be used to attack the reliability and validity of future clinical research [25][26][27].…”

Section: Hijacked Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Recognize and Avoid Potential, Possible, or Probable Predatory Open-Access Publishers, Standalone, and Hijacked Journals

Danevska

Спироски

Donev

et al. 2016

Prilozi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Today, the real scientific world is at risk of getting overshadowed and inundated under the cloud of 'pseudo science'. [3][4][5] This editorial is aimed at increasing awareness for the readers of this journal about the magnitude of the crisis in the field of scholarly publications, by highlighting various pertinent issues with emphasis on a relatively obscure aspect of publishing -bibliometric indices and our preoccupation with such. While the well known forms of publication misconduct continue unabated, such as authorship issues, conflicts of interest, plagiarism in its various forms, research fraud, salami slicing, it is of concern that the entire scholarly publication process should not get hijacked.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the well known forms of publication misconduct continue unabated, such as authorship issues, conflicts of interest, plagiarism in its various forms, research fraud, salami slicing, it is of concern that the entire scholarly publication process should not get hijacked. [2][3][4][5] Today, knowingly or unknowingly, a significant proportion of stakeholders in the field of scientific publications ranging from the authors, reviewers, editors and even the publishers often indulge in blatant violation of publication ethics in its various forms. Individual author misconduct has been known since a while now.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, increasing instances of reviewer, editorial and publisher fraud is a cause for distress for all those who wish to thrive in a genuine scientific milieu. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] One could have never imagined rigging of the peer review process! Now we have instances of journal editors being more interested in revenue generation and manipulating the entire citation process by selective publishing of articles, encouraging coercive citations and 'citation cartels' so as to artificially improve the Journal Impact Factor which would in turn attract more paying clientele authors in an Open Access (OA) format.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Changing paradigm in the scientific publication process: Are we encouraging Science or Pseudoscience? Urgent need for introspection and self regulation

Nair¹

2017

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific research and its subsequent publication in a peer reviewed journal (preferably) are essential components of professional development in the field of medicine. Scientists have endeavored over the centuries to impress their peers and leave their mark by sharing the results of their research. Anecdotal cases of scientific misconduct may have been a rarity in the past, rather than norm, which could also be attributed to a lack of wherewithal to detect such instances. However, the last decade has witnessed an unprecedented rise in the quantum of scientific publication with a proportionate increase in the incidence of scientific/publication misconduct.

show abstract

Challenges posed by hijacked journals in Scopus

Abalkina

2023

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents and explains the phenomenon of indexjacking, which involves the systematic infiltration of hijacked journals into international indexing databases, with Scopus being one of the most infiltrated among these databases. Through an analysis of known lists of hijacked journals, the study identified at least 67 hijacked journals that have penetrated Scopus since 2013. Of these, 33 journals indexed unauthorized content in Scopus and 23 compromised the homepage link in the journal's profile, while 11 did both. As of September 2023, 41 hijacked journals are still compromising the data of legitimate journals in Scopus. The presence of hijacked journals in Scopus is a challenge for scientific integrity due to the legitimization of unreliable papers that have not undergone peer review and compromises the quality of the Scopus database. The presence of hijacked journals in Scopus has far‐reaching effects. Papers published in these journals may be cited, and unauthorized content from these journals in Scopus is thus imported into other databases, including ORCID and the WHO COVID‐19 Research Database. This poses a particular challenge for research evaluation in those countries, where cloned versions of approved journals may be used to acquire publications and verifying their authenticity can be difficult.

show abstract

Hijacked Journals: An Emerging Challenge for Scholarly Publishing

Cited by 42 publications

References 4 publications

How to Recognize and Avoid Potential, Possible, or Probable Predatory Open-Access Publishers, Standalone, and Hijacked Journals

How to Recognize and Avoid Potential, Possible, or Probable Predatory Open-Access Publishers, Standalone, and Hijacked Journals

Changing paradigm in the scientific publication process: Are we encouraging Science or Pseudoscience? Urgent need for introspection and self regulation

Challenges posed by hijacked journals in Scopus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About