About Predatory Publishing
Definition
Predatory publishers or journals are those that charge authors a fee for publication with no intention of providing the expected services – such as editorial or peer review – in return. Charging a fee is a legitimate business model, but the publisher should be providing a good publishing service in return. Authors who have submitted their paper to a questionable publisher can find that they are charged a large fee if they want to withdraw their article.
Known synonyms
The concept of ‘predatory’ journals has many names: fake journals, questionable journals, illegitimate journals, deceptive journals, dark journals, and journals “operating in bad faith”.
Predatory or not?
There are many journals that do not have the best editorial or technical standards, but that are applying reasonable basic processes to their articles and operating in good faith. These are sometimes referred to as “low quality” journals and it’s important to remember that low quality doesn’t always equal predatory.
Some caution is therefore advised when considering a journal: defects in a publisher’s processes may lead to it being labelled as predatory, but the journal may simply lack resources – there may not be an intention to deceive.
Hijacked journals
A hijacked journal, sometimes also known as a ‘cloned’ journal, might mimic a legitimate journal by taking its titles, ISSN and other information without permission. The hijacked journal will solicit journal articles, pretending to be the legitimate journal, and in some instances, it might also create similar DOIs.
Things to watch out for
A predatory journal or publisher or hijacked journal may display one or more of these characteristics:
- A journal title which can be easily confused with another journal or that might mislead potential authors and readers about the journal’s origin, scope or association with other journals
- ISSN isn’t registered at the ISSN Portal
- Very wide scope
- Displays of unofficial impact factors
- False claims of being indexed in major services like PubMed, Scopus, or DOAJ
- Advertises false or fake impact factors
- No publisher address or contact information, or the address is a residential address
- Unclear ownership of the journal
- Spams researchers with many emails inviting submissions, often unrelated to expertise
- Advertises very fast times from submission to publication
- Publishes out-of-scope articles
- Publishes nonsense articles
- Poor or non-existent editing of articles (many spelling mistakes or very poor grammar)
- Hides information on charges
- No editorial board is listed, or the editorial board comprises:
- dead or retired scholars, or
- scholars who are not specialised in the topic, or
- scholars who do not know that they have been added to the board
- Lack of information on the policies of the journal, such as peer review, licensing and copyright
More on Predatory Publishing
“Predatory publishing practices: what researchers should know before submitting their manuscript”, Insights: the UKSG journal, May 2023
“Combatting Predatory Academic Journals and Conferences”, The InterAcademy Partnership (IAP), March 2022
“Avoiding predatory publishers”, Lorraine Estelle, Think.Check.Submit.,COPE, February, 2022
“A qualitative content analysis of watchlists vs safelists: How do they address the issue of predatory publishing?”, Amy Koerber et al, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(6), November 2020
“Who reviews for predatory journals? A study on reviewer characteristics”, Anna Severin et al, bioRxiv, 11 March 2020
“Predatory Journals Publishing Trend in India: A Study”, Satyabrata Garanayak and Chennupati Kodand Ramaiah, 2019
“Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: a survey”, Kelly D. Cobey et al, BMJ Open 2019
“Predatory publications in evidence syntheses”, Amanda Ross-White et al, Journal of the Medical Library Association, January 2019, 107(1): 57-61
“Predatory publishers threaten to consume public research funds and undermine national academic systems – the case of Brazil”, Marcelo S. Perlin, Takeyoshi Imasato, and Denis Borenstein, LSE Impact of Social Science, 6 September 2018
“Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study”, Marcelo S. Perlin, Takeyoshi Imasato, and Denis Borenstein, Scientometrics, 116, 255-273 (2018)
“Predatory’ Publishing Up“, Carl Straumsheim, Inside Higher Ed, 1 October 2015