Predatory publishing and cybercrime targeting academics

Umlauf, Mary Grace; Mochizuki, Yoshihiko

doi:10.1111/ijn.12656

Cited by 28 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They may also have received emails that invite them to engage in the "peer-review" process or to join the editorial board of a particular journal. Whereas according to Greco (2016), scholars who intentionally choose to send their work to predatory journals, particularly those in developing countries, are likely trying to find better work, promotion, or research grants (as cited by Umlauf and Mochizuki, 2018).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Today, papers and journals can be available online or in hybrid formats. As Umlauf and Mochizuki (2018) quote from statistics presented by Teixeira da Silva (2015), in 2015 predatory publishers published over 500,000 dubious manuscripts (in 8,000 predatory journals) and generated $75 million. That same year, legitimate publishers generated $335 million in total revenue.…”

Section: The Open Access Movement (Oa) and Article Processing Chargesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This correction (vetting) process, also known as peer review, highlights the ethical and quality lack in manuscripts. Authors usually benefit from this process because reviewers make recommendations that improve the quality of their manuscripts (Umlauf and Mochizuki, 2018). The concept of predatory publishing has been widely known since its introduction years ago by librarian Jeffrey Beall (Xia, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter have shown deceitful tendencies, scientific rigor deficiency, and their purpose is mainly the financial benefit (Kurt, 2018). Umlauf and Mochizuki (2018: 2) describe this phenomenon as follows 'This profit-driven Rewiev study scheme bypasses peer review and promises quick publication, but only after the author pays a fee. When a manuscript is poorly written or the science poorly designed, this arrangement is ideal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…' Berger (2017: 206) describes the predatory publishing as 'as low quality, amateurish, and often unethical academic publishing that is usually Open Access (OA).' Whereas, Umlauf and Mochizuki (2018) point out that the consequences of publishing in predatory journals for honest researchers are: wasting time, using data in vain, wasted money and manuscripts that end up not being indexed or archived on proper databases. Thus, the identification of these journals is very crucial for writers, scholars, reviewers, and editors, because manuscripts that do not go through the proper review process should not be included in the register of scientific data (Laine and Winker, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Avoiding publishing in predatory journals: An evaluation algorithm

Qehaja

2020

ERIES Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academics and scholars need to publish their research results. In addition, they are required to publish scientific papers to prove their research commitment and to achieve certain academic titles in higher education institutions. Globally, there are many scientific journals of well-known publishing houses/universities, which offer opportunities to publish scientific work. One of the recent topics in academic circles is the increasing number of invitations to publish articles via quick procedures, without going through the adequate review process. This phenomenon is threatening academic integrity, as these publishers/journals aim at financial benefits and not contributing to scientific development and progress. There is a gap in the knowledge of the scientific researchers regarding the journal selection to publish their work. Some of them are still unintentionally publishing in such journals, mainly as a lack of information about them. The main purpose of this study is awarenessraising, warning, and guidance of scientific researchers, particularly young researchers by providing information on how to avoid submitting manuscripts in these journals. To achieve this, we have consulted the recent literature and practices of different countries, summarized the most used tools/methods to identify predatory publishers and journals, and lastly, we have developed a guiding algorithm for evaluating them.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Open Access Movement (Oa) and Article Processing Chargesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Avoiding publishing in predatory journals: An evaluation algorithm

Qehaja

2020

ERIES Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluation of untrustworthy journals: Transition from formal criteria to a complex view

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Not all the journals included in credible indices meet the ethical rules of COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME, and there may also be trustworthy journals excluded from these indices, which means they cannot be used as whitelists for trustworthy journals. Equally, the many methods suggested to determine trustworthiness are not reliable because they include questionable criteria. The question arises whether valid criteria for identifying an untrustworthy journal can be determined and whether other assessment procedures are necessary. Since 2017, the Masaryk University Campus Library has been developing a suitable evaluation method for journals. A list of 19 criteria based on those originally suggested by Beall, COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME were reduced to 10 objectively verifiable criteria following two workshops with librarians. An evaluation of 259 biomedical journals using both the list of 19 and then 10 criteria revealed that 74 journals may have been incorrectly assessed as untrustworthy using the longer list. The most common reason for failure to comply was in the provision of sufficient editorial information and declaration of article processing charges. However, our investigation revealed that no criteria can reliably identify predatory journals. Therefore, a complex evaluation is needed combining objectively verifiable criteria with analysis of a journal's content and knowledge of the journal's background.

show abstract

Academic journals' usernames and the threat of fraudulent accounts on social media

Coates

2021

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The internet has brought both benefits and risks for academia. Predatory publishing and conferences are well-known, and less common academic cybercrime has also been identified, such as fraudulent conferences and journal hijacking. This study aimed to explore one further possible method for deceiving academics, namely, fraudulent accounts on social media. The study focused on two easily exploitable gaps in journals' social media engagement: whether journals have accounts on the most common social media platforms and whether journals use the same username across all their accounts. Evidence of fraudulent social media accounts was also sought. Drawing from a sample of 50 journals, the results indicate that many journals do not use social media, journals often use multiple usernames and fewer than half the accounts were officially verified. Some apparently fraudulent activity was found, but this was notably limited in scope and appeared to be politically rather than economically oriented.Further potential for deception was evident in accounts unaffiliated with a journal but registered with the journal's usernames and in the opportunity to create new social media accounts with journals' usernames. Journals are recommended to recognize this threat and some possible countermeasures are suggested.

show abstract

Predatory publishing and cybercrime targeting academics

Cited by 28 publications

References 20 publications

Avoiding publishing in predatory journals: An evaluation algorithm

Avoiding publishing in predatory journals: An evaluation algorithm

Evaluation of untrustworthy journals: Transition from formal criteria to a complex view

Academic journals' usernames and the threat of fraudulent accounts on social media

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About