[searchandfilter id="99"]

CategoryQuestionable Publishing

Deciding where to submit

Did you know that there are more than 25,000 biomedical journals?

The number of scientific journals continues to increase rapidly1. Given this situation, it is perhaps not surprising to learn that many authors have a difficult time deciding where to submit their manuscript for publication. There are many factors that may play a role in your decision of where to submit your manuscript.

Evaluating Open Access Journals

This guide contains information and resources related to scholarly communication and publishing at Ryerson University.

Research Integrity and Peer Review

Research Integrity and Peer Review is an international, open access, peer reviewed journal that encompasses all aspects of integrity in research publication, including peer review, study reporting, and research and publication ethics. Particular consideration is given to submissions that address current controversies and limitations in the field and offer potential solutions. We welcome research into peer review and editorial decision making, however reports of individual journal or publisher decisions or actions will not be considered.

Open access, power, and privilege – Shea Swauger

A response to “What I learned from predatory publishing”

In June 2017, Jeffrey Beall published an opinion piece in Biochemia Medica titled “What I Learned from Predatory Publishers.”1 While there are several elements of this publication that I find inaccurate or problematic, I’m choosing four specific themes within his piece to critique. In the interest of full disclosure, I am Jeffrey Beall’s direct supervisor at the University of Colorado-Denver’s Auraria Library and have been since I began working there in July 2015.

University Grants Commission (UGC) Approved List of Journals

This list of approved journals was put together by the University Grants Commission of India in an attempt to help Indian researchers stay away from scams, frauds and fakes. While it is a worth attempt, it is not without its detractors, some of whom say that the list includes more than 100 questionable journals.

The Truth about China’s Cash-for-Publication Policy

The first study of payments to Chinese scientists for publishing in high-impact journals has serious implications for the future of research. The first link is an article, written in MIT Technology Review in July 12 2017, based on the research published in the article at the 2nd link. The authors are Wei Quan, Bikun Chen, Fei Shu.

Discriminating Between Legitimate and Predatory Open Access Journals: Report from the International Federation for Emergency Medicine Research Committee

Discriminating between predatory and legitimate OA publishers is difficult. [The authors] searched a number of library indexing databases that were available… through the University of California, Irvine Libraries for journals in the field of emergency medicine (EM) [and]… categorized EM journals as legitimate or likely predatory.

Special issue on predatory publishers

A special issue, published in June 2017 in journal Biochemia Medica, called ‘Research integrity corner: Special issue on predatory journals’. There are 5 papers in this special section.

What I learned from predatory publishers

This article is a first-hand account of [Jeffrey Beall’s] work identifying and listing predatory publishers from 2012 to 2017. Predatory publishers use the gold (author pays) open access model and aim to generate as much revenue as possible, often foregoing a proper peer review. The paper details how predatory publishers came to exist and shows how they were largely enabled and condoned by the open-access social movement, the scholarly publishing industry, and academic librarians.

Beall’s Litter

A blog post from Michael Eisen’s blog ‘It is NOT junk’ explaining why he thinks that Jeffrey Beall was out to discredit open access and not just “predatory” publishers.