Journals in Beall's list perform as a group less well than other open access journals indexed in Scopus but reveal large differences among publishers

Moed, Henk F.; López-Illescas, Carmen; Guerrero‐Bote, Vicente P.; Anegón, Félix de Moya

doi:10.1002/leap.1428

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although predatory journals tend to have citation rates substantially lower than those of non-predatory journals, individual predatory journals (and individual articles) may be similar AJIM 75,5 to mid-ranked Scopus titles in their citation impact. This finding can be seen in multidisciplinary analyses (Bagues et al, 2019;Bj€ ork et al, 2020;Moed et al, 2022) and in studies of fields such as marketing (Moussa, 2021b) and the biomedical sciences (Nwagwu and Ojemeni, 2015). Overall, these studies support the conclusion that while most predatory journals have little scientific impact, some do include articles that could have been placed in much better journals if the authors had not "opted for the fast track and easier option of a predatory journal" (Bj€ ork et al, 2020, pp.…”

Section: Citation Impact Of Predatory Journalsmentioning

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Walters

2022

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTh study evaluates the apparent quality of the 10 Beall's List accounting journals with the highest citation rates by investigating whether the works that cite those journals are comparable to those that cite 11 Scopus journals of similar citation impact.Design/methodology/approachThe study investigates the characteristics of the works that cited the Beall's List and Scopus journals, 2015–2020, comparing the two groups of citing works by publication type (article, book, etc.), extent of self-citation, inclusion in Beall's List and Scopus, Open Access (OA) status, publisher type, citation impact, and country/region of interest.FindingsThe Beall's List accounting journals tend to be cited in less reputable outlets; they are especially likely to be cited in Beall's List journals and especially unlikely to be cited in Scopus journals. However, other evidence suggests that these journals occupy a distinctive niche. The works that cite Beall's List journals are especially likely to be OA, to be published by universities and other nonprofits, and to focus on lower-income countries. They also have relatively low journal and publisher self-citation rates.Originality/valueBeall's List accounting journals may be especially useful to scholars who rely on OA journals, who see their local universities as natural publishing partners, and who investigate topics of concern to developing countries. An increase in the number of non-predatory journals that cater to these authors' needs might help resolve the apparent problem of unmet demand for journal space.

show abstract

Section: Citation Impact Of Predatory Journalsmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…, 2019; Björk et al. , 2020; Moed et al. , 2022) and in studies of fields such as marketing (Moussa, 2021b) and the biomedical sciences (Nwagwu and Ojemeni, 2015).…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Walters

2022

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An author in the analyses of this study may choose to publish in the journal simply because the journal is not considered predatory by this researcher. Furthermore, a recent study finds heterogeneity in terms of the key bibliometric indicators among journals and publishers on a set journals defined as predatory (Moed et al, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles

Frandsen

2022

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars engage with so-called predatory or questionable journals for many different reasons. Among the contributing factors are monetary payoffs and the possibility of fast track faculty positions or promotion. It has been claimed that fast tracking promotion by using predatory publication outlets is an increasing problem. This study analyses the authors publishing in predatory journals with a focus on authors repeatedly publishing in predatory journals. In this study, a set of so-called predatory journals indexed in Scopus was used. The data included 243,396 authorships of articles and reviews published from 2004 to 2021 by 169,742 unique authors.This study finds that 55% of the authors publish in one of these journals only once, 34.5% publish 2-5 times in these journals, 6.3% publish in them 6-10 times, and 4.2% publish more than 10 times. Furthermore, this study finds that the mean and median number of articles and reviews is correlated with the number of articles and reviews in predatory journals. Finally, authors publishing in predatory journals do not confine themselves to these journals and also publish in validated journals as well.

show abstract

“…Также они хотят быть уверенными в том, что их работа будет представлена в максимально «безопасном» месте с точки зрения публикации. Тем не менее, 2023;8 не все журналы или издатели, занесенные Биллом в «черный» список, имеют низкие библиометрические показатели (например, в Scopus) по сравнению с их коллегами из «белого» списка [38]. Также важно учитывать различные мотивы и причины, по которым ученые публикуются в потенциально небезопасных издательствах [39; 40].…”

Section: к вопросу о критериях связанных с «хищнической» публикационн...unclassified

“…Насколько вообще важно, была ли статья, имеющая научную ценность, опубликована в «хищническом» журнале или же в «не хищническом»? Аргументом в пользу постановки данного вопроса может быть актуальность многих статей, опубликованных именно в журналах, занесенных в «черный» список Билла [38], а также немалый научный интерес, проявляемый к ним. По этой причине нынешнее PJREP может не безосновательно восприниматься некоторыми учеными как далеко не самая справедливая, даже дискриминирующая политика, которая может быть злонамеренно использована третьими лицами в своих интересах.…”

Section: в чем несовершенство нынешней редакционной этической политик...unclassified

A reflection on Springer Nature’s current editorial policies related to “predatory” journals and references

Teixeira da Silva

2023

Naučnyj redaktor i izdatelʹ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite its prominent position as one of the leading for-profit scholarly publishers of subscription and open access (OA) journals, and its membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), Springer Nature can be criticized for taking a vague approach in its editorial policies pertaining to “predatory” publishing. While cautioning authors and/or editors about the citation of papers that are published in “predatory” journals, the advice presented in the policies itself is flawed due its limitation to OA journals – thus apparently excluding the possibility that subscription journals might also be “predatory” and failing to specify precisely which journals authors and editors should be careful of, i.e., no source for the “predatory” definition of OA journals is indicated. Moreover, this vague set of policies does not have a publication date, nor is any authorship specified. The opacity of these aspects of these editorial policies limits their usefulness and weakens their objectives, namely in ostensibly offering scholarly advice to protect editors and authors. I argue that the Springer Nature policies pertaining to “predatory” publishing as they currently stand are not useful, and if left unchanged, can be a source of confusion or error for authors and editors of Springer Nature journals. In this connection, the identified risk is that if the poor advice indicated in those policies is heeded, it may encourage abuse, insults and/or indiscriminate profiling of academics, including those associated with Springer Nature journals. While assuming Springer Nature’s genuine intention to alert editors and authors against citing papers published in suspect scholarly venues, I argue that this editorial set of policies should either be rewritten to rely on clearer parameters, including a definitive list of journals for which “predatory” criteria have been defined, or abandoned as they are overly broad. The criticism is aimed at stimulating a discussion among other editors and publishers, especially COPE members.

show abstract

Journals in Beall's list perform as a group less well than other open access journals indexed in Scopus but reveal large differences among publishers

Cited by 10 publications

References 22 publications

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

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

Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles

A reflection on Springer Nature’s current editorial policies related to “predatory” journals and references

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About