As you evaluate journals, you might find lists of alleged predatory publishers and journals. However, these are not reliable tools to evaluate journals for several reasons:
The most common way authors get entangled with publishing scams is through unsolicited emails asking authors to submit to a journal. These emails might:
However, emails from predatory journals may not include any of these features, so all invitations to publish should be carefully evaluated.
Common tactics of predatory journals include
Using journal titles that are the same or slightly different from legitimate journals. Predatory journals may also mimic another journal's website or use another journal's ISSN. See the Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker, linked below, for a list of predatory journals known to be mimicking another journal's name or using its ISSN.
Making vague or false claims about their services, quality, or identity. This could include false claims about metrics like the Journal Impact Factor, inclusion in journal indexes like Web of Science, and editorial board members who may not exist or whose names may be listed without their knowledge.
Making claims that sound positive but do not demonstrate quality or legitimacy. For example, a journal might claim to be indexed by Google Scholar, which is a search engine, not a journal index. Google Scholar search results include articles published in a wide range of journals, including predatory journals, so a journal having its articles included in Google Scholar is not an indicator of its legitimacy.
Promising a very short turnaround for peer review and acceptance. Quality peer review takes time. Placing emphasis on unusually short turnaround times may be a sign of deceptive tactics as well as a sign that peer review will not occur.
Using pressure tactics, such as mentioning an imminent deadline for submission. Tactics could also include mentioning a time-limited discount on publishing fees. These may be pressure tactics to instill a sense of urgency in authors. The shorter the deadline, the more cautious authors should be about submitting.
Offering very low publishing charges (for example, $150 dollars or less). This may be another deceptive tactic intended to entice unsuspecting authors into submitting their articles.
Engaging in deceptive and unethical business practices. This could include the journal asking for additional hidden fees after accepting an article for publication.
Having an unclear scope or including a confusing range of subjects in the journal's scope. The journal's scope may be unclear or include seemingly unrelated subjects. It may also emphasize that it accepts a wide range of article types. These may be tactics to maximize the number of authors whose work would be a fit for the scope and who ultimately might be willing to submit. However, there are many legitimate multidisciplinary journals (such as PLOS ONE, the Open Library of Humanities Journal, and Springer Nature's Scientific Reports), so a multidisciplinary scope is not in itself a red flag.
Requesting or allowing articles to be submitted by email rather than through a submission system, which is a typical requirement
of legitimate publishers. A predatory journal might be hoping that busy authors will send article submissions over email to save time and that they won't look too closely at the journal’s website.
Poor website quality. Check the journal's website for spelling and grammar errors, distorted images, and unprofessional design. However, keep in mind that a good-looking website is not a sign of a journal's legitimacy. It may still be missing key information, like submission guidelines, an article retraction policy, a digital preservation plan for content, or a copyright policy.
Use these resources to verify claims about the journal's ISSN, Journal Impact Factor, or inclusion in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) or Web of Science journal indexes.
Chat