Predatory publishers: Using Open Access for the wrong reasons

Abstract

The rise of Open Access (OA) and its Gold business model – based on Article Process Charges (APC’s) – led to a new phenomenon that might be potentially damaging for the development of OA and the quality of academic publications: the predatory publisher. These publishers do not list positive peer-reviews as a criteria for their publications, but the fact that the supply side (i.e. the author, his/her institution, or a funding body) has paid for it. By taking on everything or even actively sending spam mail to academics, offering a chance to publish with them, these publishers create misconceptions about OA and, more importantly, may even devalue OA publications. The problem with modern technology is that everyone can build a website and pretend to be an OA publisher, which makes it even easier for these predatory publishers. So how to restore this trust and make sure that all OA publications are of a certain quality? Who will check the authority of these publishers, and how? Who will step up and protect authors, but also the concept of OA, from falling into the hands of these predatory publishers whose only goal it is to make money? Big OA platforms such as OAPEN Library and DOAJ only accept material that has been peer-reviewed. Others, like Jeffrey Beall, have made a blacklist of all potentially damaging publishers. In the end, a growing awareness seems to be one of the most important features to tackle this problem that is harmful on various levels. This paper will dive into the results – both positive and negative – of predatory publishers

    Similar works