Predatory journals and disputable publishers
Predatory journals and disputable publishers are a very serious but relatively difficult problem of violating academic integrity. They are a natural consequence of the current pressure to accelerate publishing activity in the spirit of "publish or perish". Scientometric "stress" opens up possibilities for many less transparent and even unethical moments of publishing, which is reflected in the reduced quality of some works. Since the entire process can have many sophisticated elements, it is not easy to objectively assess whether a given journal or the entire publishing house is risky from the point of view of academic integrity. In this context, the FNS places great emphasis on the careful selection of a periodical so that the published work is not questioned in any way in the future
The Bell's List (https://beallslist.net) presents disputable (predatory) journals and publishers, but subjective moments also appear in every evaluation. The discussion does not stop even with many entire publishers. In this context, the FNS recognizes the need for careful selection of journals and an even distribution of publishing activities across a wide range of publishers. A strong focus on a single publisher (e.g. MDPI or Frontiers) may give the impression of speculation with subsequent consequences when evaluating publishing activities.
What are some signs that you should pay more attention to a given publisher or journal?
- You regularly receive invitations from the journal to publish in it, often with the promise of a quick release. Often these are invitations that do not even relate to your research orientation at all or only partially.
- The journal has managed to sharply increase its scientometric indicators from year to year. A very large number of citations are from the same journal or publishing house.
- The journal publishes a huge number of articles. There have been cases of hundreds not of articles, but of special issues per year.
We also recommend focusing on
- Look at the editorial board. Are there people from Western Europe and the USA? What universities are they from? What is the research profile and reputation of the editors?
- What is the tradition of the journal? How long has it been published? This may not always be definitive, but it completes the picture, it is a small insurance policy. This also applies to other points.
- Have prominent world persons in your discipline published in it? Is the journal published by a respected research association (this is not necessary for quality, but it is a good insurance policy)
- How frequent are retractions? Does it regularly appear on lists of problematic journals? What are the reasons, if any? "Browse" the journal on the web.
- Look through a few issues and "play" the role of a reviewer, to see if you come across articles with flagrant errors or with signs of scientific simplicity, triviality, so to speak. If there are more of them at a cursory glance, it is a warning sign.
- There are still journals that allow the possibility of publishing via "subscription", without a fee. No, open access may not be a problem (there are many top journals where you have to pay, and not a little), but if the journal does not make a lot of money on each article, it is certainly a good sign.
- Look at where your colleagues, prominent scientists and "opinion-forming" colleagues publish. There is no problem or shame in asking, even if you are already high on the scientific ladder. On the contrary, look at the lesser-known names that have sharply increased their publication "output" recently, although they did not publish too much or of high quality before.
More about predatory journals and problematic publishers:
https://midas.uniba.sk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/predatorstvo_181108.pdf