1. Predatory Journals – Any Issues?
Dr. Joel Sam
Director, CSIR-INSTI

2. Research Cultures
Research cultures are the systems, practices, and traditions established in academia that govern the conduct, reporting, and evaluation of scholarly research and communication
Research institutions/Universities
Reward system – rely on achievement in scholarly publishing
Measure of success
Standard for measuring individual academic achievement

4. Scholarly Communication
Scholarly communication is a process of knowledge delivery practiced by members of the academic community. A vital part of this process is the broadest possible sharing of academic publications among scholars and students
According to the ALA, scholarly communication is the system through which research and other scholarly writings are created, evaluated for quality, disseminated to the scholarly community, and preserved for future use

5. Scholarly Communication - Functions
Registration – allows claims of precedence for a scholarly finding
Certification – establishes the validity of a registered scholarly claim
Awareness – allows actors in the scholarly system to remain aware of new claims and findings
Archiving – preserves the scholarly record over time
Rewarding – rewards actors for their performance in the communication system based on metrics derived from that system

6. Scientific Communication – Methods of Dissemination
Scholarly Journals
Predatory Journals
Seminars
Conferences
Reports
Policy Briefs
Books
Reviews
Web publishing

7. Scholarly Journals
Are considered as those that the authors have in mind academics or the intellectual community and their publications are handled by recognized societies with academic goals and missions
Are also called academic, peer-reviewed, or refereed journals
Strictly speaking, peer-reviewed (also called refereed) journals refer only to those scholarly journals that submit articles to several other scholars, experts, or academics (peers) in the field for review and comment (slow, ineffective, misunderstood)

8. Scholarly Journals, contd.
These reviewers must agree that the article represents properly conducted original research or writing before it can be published. The purpose is to guarantee the scientific quality
Form of publication that brings its author the greatest prestige (ID example)
Visibility of the author(s) and Institutions (Abstracting and Indexing Services)
Improved chances of receiving competitive grants
Given great weight by committees making appointments and promotions

9. Predatory Journals Threatening the credibility of science
Faking or neglecting peer review
Polluting the scholarly record with fringe or junk science
Come to be known as predatory journals
A term coined by Jeffrey Beall (2010) that describes an open access publishing style which does not provide editorial and publishing services associated with legitimate journals
Beall’s List of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers

10. Predatory Journals, contd.
Business practices (engage in spam solicitations, steal content from reputable journals)
Publisher’s honesty (fake academics to editorial board, fake impact factors)
Aggressively campaigning for academics to submit articles or serve on editorial boards
Transparency (hides author charges until manuscript acceptance or hides content from search engines)
Accept articles quickly with little or no peer review

11. Predatory Journals, contd.
Mimicking the name or website style of more established journals
Improper use of ISSNs
Fail on these criteria: suspected to be “predatory”
Questionable practices
When exposed, harms the reputation of the author and institution
Author, Beware!!!
‘Publish AND Perish’

12. Predatory Journals – Critics of Beall’s List
Not fair to classify the journals and publishers as “predatory”
Analyses sweeping generalizations with no supporting evidence
Focuses entirely on open access publishing
Biased against open access journals from less economically developed countries

13. Predatory Journals – Critics of Beall’s List, contd.
Instances of inconsistency and ambiguity – list should be ignored
Relies heavily on publishers’ website, not engaging directly with publishers
Wrong for a single person to maintain such a list, especially when lacking discipline knowledge
Less than 1% of all author pays open access, far lower than Beall’s estimate of 5-10%

14. Predatory Journals – In Defense of Beall’s List
Good at spotting publishers with poor quality control
Beall being an enemy of open access is periphery
Sheds light on a real and serious problem with author-pays scholarly publishing
Opportunistic publishers (Vanity Presses)
Deceptive publishing practices (Yellow Journalism and advertisements formatted to look like articles)
Discussion not be turned into debate over shortcomings of peer review – it is nothing of the sort

15. Predatory Journals – In Defense of Beall’s List
It is about fraud, deception and irresponsibility
Bad faith
publishers (false peer review/impact factor);
authors (intentionally pay for and benefit from review and certification services they know is fraudulent);
peer reviewers (who only pretend to do rigorous review)

16. Way Forward
Research institutes to improve publication literacy among junior scientists (Mentoring)
Researchers to have adequate research guidance early in their careers
Work in resource-poor environments
Lack research writing skills
Yet face the pressure to ‘publish or perish’
Research institutes to audit journals in which researchers publish
Necessary for the reputation of the researcher and the institution

17. Way Forward, contd. Think – Check -
Are you submitting your research to the right journal?
Is it the right journal for your work?
Check -
Who are its readers?
Are they part of your research community?
Do you or your colleagues know the journal?
Have you read any articles in the journal before?
Is it easy to discover the latest papers in the journal?

18. Way Forward, contd. Check –
Can you easily identify and contact the publisher?
Is the publisher name clearly displayed on the journal website?
Can you contact the publisher by telephone, , and post?
Is the journal clear about the type of peer review it uses?
Are the articles indexed in services that you use?
Is it clear what fees will be charged?
Does the journal site explain what these fees are for and when they will be charged?

19. Way Forward, contd. Check – Submit –
Do you recognize the editorial board?
Have you heard of the editorial board members?
Is the publisher a member of a recognized industry initiative?
Do they belong to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)?
If the journal is open access, is it listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)?
If the journal is open access, does the publisher belong to the Open Access Scholarly Publishers’ Association (OASPA)?
Submit –
Only if you can answer ‘YES’ to the questions above