[…] new open access (OA) oriented brand extensions points to the ongoing importance of brand management. Brand confusion is something some predatory publishers exploit. Uniqueness: High. Value: High, but diminished by imposters. Importance: Moderate. Primary beneficiary(ies): 🔬 😇 ✍️ 🌍 😈. Secondary beneficiary(ies): 🏛 💰. Make money […]
The five stages of book publishing outlined here describe the arc as publishers move from the traditional model (where print books were sold mostly in bookstores and to libraries) through a range of developments using online media, culminating in new […]
[…] two things gave me motivation. Firstly, there was nothing out there at the time that gave the full picture on predatory publishing, either on predatory journals themselves or on the wider issues in scholarly communications that facilitated their emergence. Of course, […]
An interview with librarian and open access skeptic Jeffrey Beall. He discusses his work, the criteria for declaring an organization a “predatory publisher,” and how he would fix the scholarly communications system.
Thanks to a major new international research study, it’s no longer possible to pretend that predatory journals are not a serious problem that needs serious attention. The question is: do we have the will to confront it?
Are we losing good articles to predatory journals, with little recourse for unsuspecting authors? Or are authors becoming increasingly complicit and symbiotic in their relationships with illegitimate publishing entities with disregard for the greater good? Maybe it’s both. Today’s guest […]
Predatory publishing is a big and complex problem; so is calling out and shaming deceptive publishers by means of blacklisting. Is that something we should even do, and can it be done fairly, constructively, and helpfully? Yes, and here are […]
Illegitimate – or predatory – journals are on the increase. What’s more, authors from high-, middle-, and low-income countries are now known to be publishing in them. Find out why this is the case and how we can work as […]
[…] understanding of the work and the extent to which it was produced using AI. TAC: How big a problem is predatory publishing? ChatGPT Response: Predatory publishing, also known as deceptive or illegitimate publishing, is a significant problem in the academic world. […]
[…] that the high level of acceptance is unsurprising because nearly half of the publishers were listed on Beall’s List of predatory publishers. That would be persuasive if the vast majority of the acceptances were from Beall’s List alone, leaving the […]
The Public Library of Science was once a radical force, but is now dependent on author-pays bulk-publishing for its livelihood, which introduces all sorts of problems for every journal publisher. What went wrong?
[…] Publishing Institute, MDPI is no stranger to controversy. In 2014, the company was named to Jeffrey Beall’s infamous list of predatory publishers. After a concerted rehabilitation effort, they were removed from Beall’s list. Since then, incidents include editors at one […]
[…] that cut the most corners would win. We already see this when authors submit to both a reputable and a predatory journal. Journals would be incentivized to use fewer reviewers and rounds of revision to secure each publication; authors could […]
[…] strict limitation on issuing new Chinese journal licenses has ensured high standards for launching new titles in China, many overseas predatory publishers continuously lower the standards to attract Chinese submissions. The system of a blacklist and early warning list will […]
Recent coordinated investigatory journalism articles, along with separate regulatory actions, are squeezing predatory publishers. But are the root causes being addressed?