What I learned from predatory publishers
- PMID: 28694718
- PMCID: PMC5493177
- DOI: 10.11613/BM.2017.029
What I learned from predatory publishers
Abstract
This article is a first-hand account of the author'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. The author describes tactics predatory publishers used to attempt to be removed from his lists, details the damage predatory journals cause to science, and comments on the future of scholarly publishing.
Keywords: journals; open access; predatory publishers; research; scholarly publishing.
Conflict of interest statement
Potential conflict of interest: None declared.
References
-
- Farrell D, editor. Systems and procedures exchange center (SPEC) flyer. In: Serials control and deselection projects. 147th ed. Washington, NW: Association of research libraries, Office of management service, 1988. p. 1-2.
-
- Anonymous. Posterous. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterous. Accessed February 9th 2017.
-
- Moosa IA. A critique of the bucket classification of journals: The ABDC list as an example. Econ Rec. 2016;92:448–63. 10.1111/1475-4932.12258 - DOI
-
- Gieryn TF. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. Am Sociol Rev. 1983;48:781–95. 10.2307/2095325 - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
