Discriminating Between Legitimate and Predatory Open Access Journals: Report from the International Federation for Emergency Medicine Research Committee (original) (raw)
Related papers
Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives
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.
In . . . and Out: Open Access Publishing in Scientific Journals - Salem et al
Open access (OA) journals are a growing phenomenon largely of the past decade wherein readers can access the content of scientific journals without paying for a subscription. The costs are borne by authors (or their institutions) who pay a fee to be published, thus allowing readers to access, search, print, and cite the journals without cost. Although the OA model, in and of itself, need not diminish scientific rigor, selectivity, or peer review, the "author pays" model creates an inherent conflict of interest: it operates with the incentive on the part of the journal to publish more and reject less. This is coupled with cost containment measures that affect the journals' ability to engage experienced editors and professional staff to scrutinize data, data analyses, and author conflicts of interest. While some OA journals appear to be comparable to their print competitors, others are "predatory" and have no legitimacy at all. Two recent "scams"-one recently published in Science-highlight the urgency of addressing the issues raised by OA publication so that OA does not lose its credibility just as it begins to gather substantial momentum. High-quality journals develop their reputations over time, and OA outlets will be no exception. For this to occur, however, the OA audience will need to be satisfied that OA can deliver high-quality publications utilizing rigorous peer review, editing, and conflict of interest scrutiny. Academic tenure and promotion committees that review scholarly credentials are understandably skeptical of publications in unrecognized journals, and the large number of new OA outlets contributes to this urgency from their perspective as well.
Predatory Publications- A Curse for The Scholarly Open Access Publishing
PEARL - A Journal of Library and Information Science, 2023
Research published during the last decades has shown that there is immense growth in the number of fake publishers and predatory journals. There is misconception about the Open Access (OA) publishing and often is compared with predatory publishing, whereas open access resources are qualitative and free for multipurpose usage and reuse. A severe threat is being posed by the predatory publishing to science and its credibility through avoiding or faking the peer review process, pollution of scholarly literature with junk articles and through commercial interests. This research paper throws light on the concept of the predatory publications, criteria for identifying the predatory journals, librarian’s role and has suggested some preventive measures to avoid such journals.
The Dark Side of Dissemination: Traditional and Open Access Versus Predatory Journals
Nursing education perspectives
The purpose of the article is to alert faculty about predatory online journals, review characteristics of three broad categories of journals, and provide suggestions for faculty evaluation of journals before submission of scholarship for publication. The availability of online journals in recent years has rapidly increased the number of journals available for publication of faculty scholarship. However, not all online journals meet the same standards as traditional journals. The article is not a report for a research study. Currently, there are three broad categories of journals for faculty scholarship publication: traditional, open access scholarly, and predatory open access journals. Faculty authors need to carefully evaluate the journal characteristics and publisher business practices before submitting a manuscript for publication to prevent inadvertent submission to a predatory open access journal.
BMC medicine, 2017
The Internet has transformed scholarly publishing, most notably, by the introduction of open access publishing. Recently, there has been a rise of online journals characterized as 'predatory', which actively solicit manuscripts and charge publications fees without providing robust peer review and editorial services. We carried out a cross-sectional comparison of characteristics of potential predatory, legitimate open access, and legitimate subscription-based biomedical journals. On July 10, 2014, scholarly journals from each of the following groups were identified - potential predatory journals (source: Beall's List), presumed legitimate, fully open access journals (source: PubMed Central), and presumed legitimate subscription-based (including hybrid) journals (source: Abridged Index Medicus). MEDLINE journal inclusion criteria were used to screen and identify biomedical journals from within the potential predatory journals group. One hundred journals from each group wer...