[…] Beall, whose widely-read Scholarly Open Access blog lists publishers (including OMICS) that Beall considers to be questionable or out-and-out “ predatory.” For the most part, these are publishers working under an open access (OA) model that exacts up-front charges from […]
[…] fraud easier to detect (anti-plagiarism software, duplicate submission checking, etc.). Another threat to the trust system comes from the so-called predatory publishers. The advent of open access (OA) journals with the author-pays model has provided a new and potentially profitable […]
[…] weighted averages clustering between 3.5 and 4.0 on a five-point scale. The highest-rated concerns center on research integrity and trust: predatory publishing and paper mills (4.01), declining public trust (3.97), threats to evidence-based knowledge (3.97), intellectual property protection in the AI […]
[…] But, 1) have we ever measured what “real disasters” are happening (not the imaginary ones) because of articles published in predatory and low quality journals which don’t follow publishing standards, including the peer review process? We however continue to argue […]
[…] if they were vetted and peer-reviewed science published in a venue that is willing to accept responsibility for them. Just as predatory publishers have recognized in the APC funding model an opportunity to lie and make money, mendacious authors have recognized […]
[…] with the name of an established publisher or institution, some will be upstarts, and some will be labelled as “ predatory” publishers because of the limitations of their peer-review practices. How long will it be before these domain-specific author-pays services […]
[…] et al.; how authors perceive peer review (“Is it equivalent to a coin toss”); the “portal problem”; declining library budgets; predatory OA publishers; the long-forecast but still delayed “death” of the article; the open access “price wars”; whether article retractions […]
[…] dwindling news staff. Indulge me while I start to weave in some thoughts on how this related to scholarly publishing. Predatory journals are not exactly the same as fake news organizations but they certainly are publishing papers of dubious quality. […]
[…] to evaluate health information (and the publishers of that information) on their own, so they are not falling victim to predatory practices that obscure a lack of information vetting and editing. We agreed that the most effective way for librarians […]
[…] game science, the actor can knowingly choose to submit to an established journal like Science or to a vanity or predatory journal that works on a pay-to-publish model. Table 1: Scholarly Disinformation Taxonomy Category Subcategory Definition and examples Actors (Who) […]
[…] can we do differently to prepare for the next pandemic(s)? Has COVID-19 created issues of trust in scholarly publishing (i.e., predatory publishing, conflicting evidence, article retractions)? Have the changes to scholarly publishing during COVID-19 resulted in new ways of sharing knowledge […]
[…] generalist repositories that support preprints including figshare, Authorea, and SSRN. There is at least one ‘published’ paper in the suspected predatory publisher openventio. The same paper may be distributed among multiple platforms but not all papers are on one. A […]
[…] if they were vetted and peer-reviewed science published in a venue that is willing to accept responsibility for them. Just as predatory publishers have recognized in the APC funding model an opportunity to lie and make money, mendacious authors have recognized […]
[…] Nalwa, who also serves as Editor-in-Chief of two ASP journals. ASP is listed on an archived copy of Beall’s List of predatory publishers although it does not appear on either Cabell’s whitelist or blacklist of scholarly journals. Bone Research is a […]
[…] area would be open access publishing – there is likely room for a few more “born-OA” publishers of the non- predatory variety (one of our investors notes is likely to observe that it ain’t called “Gold OA” for nothing). And […]