Deceptive Publishing: Why We Need a Blacklist, and Some Suggestions on How to Do It Right

Rick Anderson, Aug 17, 2015
Commentary by Stephen Downes

One of the weaknesses of Gold Open Access publishing (that's the model where open access is provided by a publisher) has been the rise of predatory publishing, where commercial enterprises set up fake journals with the idea of scamming authors or institutions into paying publication fees. Rick Anderson suggest that a blacklist is in order, and identifies four (or maybe five) types of predatory journals: phony journals, such as promotional sock-puppets; pseudo-scholarly journals, which don't do proper peer review and editing; false flag journals, which fool people into thinking they are submitting to legitimate journals; and Masqueraders, which pretend to have an association with a prestigious institution. The possible fifth category is constituted of legitimate journals who are abusing their position by charging predatory prices (Anderson is obviously far less concerned about them).

Views: 0 today, 301 total (since January 1, 2017).[Direct Link]