Who Publishes in “Predatory” Journals?

Many open access journals have a reputation for being of low quality and being dishonest with regard to peer review and publishing costs. Such journals are labeled “predatory” journals. This study examines author profiles for some of these “predatory” journals as well as for groups of more well-recognized open access journals. We collect and analyze the publication record, citation count, and geographic location of authors from the various groups of journals. Statistical analyses verify that each group of journals has a distinct author population. Those who publish in “predatory” journals are, for the most part, young and inexperienced researchers from developing countries. We believe that economic and sociocultural conditions in these developing countries have contributed to the differences found in authorship between “predatory” and “nonpredatory” journals

Is this a quality journal to publish in? How can you tell?

This article summarizes a presentation delivered by Beth Bernhardt at the 2016 North Carolina Serials Conference. Bernhardt's talk provided an overview of predatory and unethical publishing practices, provided resources to consult when evaluating open access journal quality, and discussed examples from her work at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG). The presentation's focus was on helping librarians and others prepare to serve as resources for faculty members who may need assistance in evaluating open access journals as potential publication venues

A cross-sectional study of predatory publishing emails received by career development grant awardees

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the scope of academic spam emails (ASEs) among career development grant awardees and the factors associated with the amount of time spent addressing them. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey of career development grant investigators via an anonymous online survey was conducted. In addition to demographic and professional information, we asked investigators to report the number of ASEs received each day, how they determined whether these emails were spam and time they spent per day addressing them. We used bivariate analysis to assess factors associated with the amount of time spent on ASEs. SETTING: An online survey sent via email on three separate occasions between November and December 2016. PARTICIPANTS: All National Institutes of Health career development awardees funded in the 2015 fiscal year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors associated with the amount of time spent addressing ASEs. RESULTS: A total of 3492 surveys were emailed, of which 206 (5.9%) were returned as undeliverable and 96 (2.7%) reported an out-of-office message; our overall response rate was 22.3% (n=733). All respondents reported receiving ASEs, with the majority (54.4%) receiving between 1 and 10 per day and spending between 1 and 10 min each day evaluating them. The amount of time respondents reported spending on ASEs was associated with the number of peer-reviewed journal articles authored (p<0.001), a history of publishing in open access format (p<0.01), the total number of ASEs received (p<0.001) and a feeling of having missed opportunities due to ignoring these emails (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: ASEs are a common distraction for career development grantees that may impact faculty productivity. There is an urgent need to mitigate this growing problem

Journal Articles: How to Choose a Home for your Research

As Kean University is working towards a new Carnegie research classification of R2, it is becoming increasingly more important for faculty and students to publish in academic journals. Carnegie Research Classification The Carnegie Classification has been the leading framework for ranking university programs in higher education scholarship for nearly 50 years (Huang, 2018). As Kean University seeks R2 status, which essentially means there is “High Research Activity” in and among their doctoral students and faculty, as well as a certain threshold of research expenditures (as reported in the Higher Education Research and Development Survey). That said, faculty need to know not only how to design and conduct research, but also how to be informed about where and how to publish their scholarly work

Open Access perpetuates differences between higher- and lower-income countries

We dedicate this letter to the memory of Sue Kilham, an outstanding mentor and ecologist.Peer reviewe

Predatory Publishing and Turkey

[Abtract Not Available

Risk of publication in worthless journals

oai:nepjol:article/22217Implementing research and publishing results is a crucial for a professional development, scientific communication and collaboration of any academicians, scholars, and researchers in science around the world. The timely dissemination of knowledge and scientific information in the global scientific community helps the development of science and worldwide recognition. The researchers working on scientific community cannot appreciate the value of evidence generated without publishing their work in right and quality journals. Therefore, authors should be careful about predatory or fake journals/publishers for communicating their scientific works. The objective of this study is to raise awareness on predatory or fake publishers/journals and of their dishonest publishing practices. In general, the predatory journal publishes without peer review and true editorial board, often publish mediocre or even worthless papers on charging high publication cost, citing fake and non-existing impact factors and mostly focused on private business motives. On the other hand, publishing in a high impact quality journals undoubtedly enhances the future career prospects, communication ability of authors and deliver concise research messages in the scientific field. Researcher of various disciplines and academic experience should aware with the lists of predatory journals/publishers which are available on Beall’s list in internet before publishing any research articles. Therefore, publishing in predatory/fake journals not only spoil or degrade academic reputations but also waste the time, resources and research message too