- \n
- The rise of online-only, open access publishing inadvertently spawned a parasite industry of predatory journals.<\/li>\n
- AI, checklists, critical appraisal by authors, and registers of respectable open access journals can all help protect scientific integrity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/AdobeStock_49114021.jpeg?resize=1024%2C685&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\nPredatory journals aim to lure unaware, unscrupulous, or disillusioned<\/a> authors, ensnaring their research and money. In an editorial<\/a> for the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, <\/em>Editor-in-Chief Are Brean describes how a “tidal wave\u201d of increasingly sophisticated predatory journals is degrading trust in science. Over at Medscape<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Neurology<\/em><\/a> Editor-in-Chief Jos\u00e9 Merino and host Andrew Wilner discuss<\/a> how to identify legitimate, peer reviewed journals in the era of online-only, open access publishing. Read on for a summary of their top tips.<\/p>\n
Apex predators<\/strong><\/p>\n
Brean warns that predatory journals have come a long way since librarian Jeffrey Beall coined the term<\/a> in 2008. Modern predators may:<\/p>\n
- \n
- use names that look like those of established journals<\/strong><\/li>\n
- list reputable scientists<\/strong> as colleagues (without their knowledge)<\/li>\n
- use counterfeit indexing<\/strong> in recognised databases<\/li>\n
- be linked to paper mills<\/strong><\/a><\/li>\n
- \u2018<\/strong>hijack<\/strong><\/a>\u2019 legitimate journals<\/strong> via URL fraud<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Open access fees: when are they a red flag?<\/strong><\/p>\n
Article processing charges (APCs) are a recognised and established funding model<\/a> in open access scientific publishing<\/a>, and most journals are now online only. So, in this environment, how can researchers tell the difference between a legitimate journal and a fraud? Brean and Merino make the following suggestions:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Critically assess<\/strong> the journal\u2019s credentials. Ask yourself:<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n
- \n
- Have you heard of this journal? Has anybody you know published there?<\/li>\n
- Does the journal have a track record? When was it established?<\/li>\n
- Is it supported by a recognisable publisher?<\/li>\n
- Is it accessible?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n
- \n
- Read a sample<\/strong> of the journal\u2019s output. Are the articles \u2018interesting, credible, and of good quality\u2019?<\/li>\n
- Use a free checklist<\/strong><\/a>.<\/li>\n
- Ask your medical librarian<\/strong> for guidance.<\/li>\n
- Consult a register of reputable journals such as the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Defence mechanisms<\/strong><\/p>\n
Brean also suggests that artificial intelligence<\/a> could be used to expose predatory journals. Research in this area is ongoing<\/a>.<\/p>\n
For now, the editors encourage (human) authors and researchers to be careful and critical. Don\u2019t get caught in the predatory publishing trap.<\/p>\n
\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2013<\/p>\n
- Use a free checklist<\/strong><\/a>.<\/li>\n
- Read a sample<\/strong> of the journal\u2019s output. Are the articles \u2018interesting, credible, and of good quality\u2019?<\/li>\n
- list reputable scientists<\/strong> as colleagues (without their knowledge)<\/li>\n
- use names that look like those of established journals<\/strong><\/li>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Jack-Seymour_new-byline_3.png?resize=1024%2C125&ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n