Time to stop talking about ‘predatory journals’

Eriksson, Stefan; Helgesson, Gert

doi:10.1002/leap.1135

Cited by 92 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, when a researcher's work is published along with nonscholarly articles, it will be corrupted by them. Most research on predatory journals concentrates on the history, nature, and characteristics of such journals in an attempt to make researchers aware of their subterfuge and provide guidance and strategies to avoid falling prey to them (Beall, 2012;Dadkhah & Bianciardi, 2016;Dadkhah, Maliszewski, & Jazi, 2016;Eriksson & Helgesson, 2018;Mcleod, Savage, & Simkin, 2018). There are some studies that investigate the reasons behind publication in such bogus journals.…”

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

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early definitions by Beall describe predatory journals as outlets “which publish counterfeit journals to exploit the open-access model in which the author pays” and journals that were “dishonest and lack transparency” 1 . Others have since suggested that we move away from using the term ‘predatory journal’, in part because the term neglects to adequately capture journals that fail to meet expected professional publishing standards, but do not intentionally act deceptively 12– 15 . This latter view suggests that the rise of so-called predatory journals is not strictly associated with dubious journal operations that use the open-access publishing model (e.g., publishing virtually anything to earn an article processing charge (APC)), but represents a wider spectrum of problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other terms to denote predatory journals such as “illegitimate journals 9, 16 ”, “deceptive journals 15 ”, “dark” journals 17 , and “journals operating in bad faith 13 ” have appeared in the literature, but like the term “predatory journal” they are reductionist 11 and may not adequately reflect the varied spectrum of quality present in the scholarly publishing landscape and the distinction between low-quality and intentionally dubious journals. These terms have also not garnered widespread acceptance, and it is possible that the diversity in nomenclature leads to confusion for researchers and other stakeholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is a predatory journal? A scoping review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is no standardized definition of what a predatory journal is, nor have the characteristics of these journals been delineated or agreed upon. In order to study the phenomenon precisely a definition of predatory journals is needed. The objective of this scoping review is to summarize the literature on predatory journals, describe its epidemiological characteristics, and to extract empirical descriptions of potential characteristics of predatory journals. Methods: We searched five bibliographic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase, ERIC, and PsycINFO, and Web of Science on January 2 nd, 2018. A related grey literature search was conducted March 27 th, 2018. Eligible studies were those published in English after 2012 that discuss predatory journals. Titles and abstracts of records obtained were screened. We extracted epidemiological characteristics from all search records discussing predatory journals. Subsequently, we extracted statements from the empirical studies describing empirically derived characteristics of predatory journals. These characteristics were then categorized and thematically grouped. Results: 920 records were obtained from the search. 344 of these records met our inclusion criteria. The majority of these records took the form of commentaries, viewpoints, letters, or editorials (78.44%), and just 38 records were empirical studies that reported empirically derived characteristics of predatory journals. We extracted 109 unique characteristics from these 38 studies, which we subsequently thematically grouped into six categories: journal operations, article, editorial and peer review, communication, article processing charges, and dissemination, indexing and archiving, and five descriptors. Conclusions: This work identified a corpus of potential characteristics of predatory journals. Limitations of the work include our restriction to English language articles, and the fact that the methodological quality of articles included in our extraction was not assessed. These results will be provided to attendees at a stakeholder meeting seeking to develop a standardized definition for what constitutes a predatory journal.

show abstract

“…Nicholas, Clark, & Herman, ). We have also published many articles on predatory publishing that range from accusing the gold OA model for encouraging fraudulent publishing (Beall, ), to criticizing the polarity of judging journals to be either ‘good’ or ‘bad’ (Eriksson & Helgesson, ; Smart, ), to asking why authors choose to publish in them (Kurt, ).…”

Section: Is Fraud and Piracy The New Norm?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Question all assumptions: Learned Publishing at 30

Smart¹

2018

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time to stop talking about ‘predatory journals’

Cited by 92 publications

References 17 publications

Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives

Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives

What is a predatory journal? A scoping review

Question all assumptions: Learned Publishing at 30

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About