The most comprehensive and easy definition for the term Predatory Publishing was given in 2019 by a team of international scholars in an issue of the journal Nature. The result was: "Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices.”
Predatory publishing has become more common since the rise of online publishing, particularly open access (OA) journals. In OA, authors pay a fee to have their work published. This isn’t the issue itself, as many reputable publishers use this model. The problem lies with predatory journals that only exist to collect these fees without caring about the quality or ethics of the articles they publish.
The risks of predatory publishers are numerous and could potentially harm your academic and work career.
As stated in article Predatory Publishing: the Threath Continues: "Predatory publishing harms the integrity of the scientific record and the reputation of scholarly publishing. Predatory journals provide readers with content that has not been properly vetted and is often of poor quality. Citations to articles from predatory journals, which occur with some regularity in legitimate journals, risk providing misinformation to readers. Predatory publishing also harms individuals. Predatory journals take advantage of unsuspecting authors. Predatory journals’ deceptive names mimic the titles of legitimate journals, which can cause people to confuse a predatory journal with a similarly‐named legitimate journal. Authors who publish their work in predatory journals will not have it indexed in bibliographic databases, such as MEDLINE and CINAHL. Articles in predatory journals may be difficult to locate because of the poor quality of these journals' websites. Authors may even have their articles disappear entirely if a journal ceases publication because predatory publishers rarely have appropriate archiving.
People may find themselves listed as editorial board members for predatory journals, with or without their knowledge. Ultimately, involvement with predatory publishing may damage individuals’ work and reputations."
Also, it is usually very difficult to withdraw a submitted paper from a predatory publisher. Sometimes, predatory publishers will publish a manuscript without the author's permission, making it unlikely be to publishable anywhere else.
Think. Check. Submit. helps researchers identify trusted journals and publishers for their research. With of tools and practical resources, this international cross-sector initiative aims to educate researchers, promote integrity, and build trust in credible research and publications.
Check this video for a quick but complete explanation on predatory publishers and how to assess academic journals!
You can also self- assess the quality of a journal by keeping into consideration different factors. The Committee on Publication Ethics has outlined 16 warning signs you should check in journals you want to publish with:
1. Website: The journal’s website contains misleading or false information (eg, indexing, metrics, membership of scholarly publishing organisations), lacks an ISSN or uses one that has already been assigned to another publication, mimics another journal/publisher’s site, or has no past or recent journal content.
2. Name of journal: The journal name is the same as or easily confused with that of another; scope, or association.
3. Peer review process: Peer review and peer review process and model are not mentioned, or manuscript acceptance or a very short peer review time is guaranteed. Submitted manuscripts receive inadequate or no peer review.
4. Ownership and management: Information about the ownership and/or management is missing, unclear, misleading, or false.
5. Governing body: Information on the editorial board is missing, misleading, false, or inappropriate for the journal; full names and affiliations of editorial board members are missing.
6. Editorial team/contact information: Full names and affiliations of the journal’s editor/s and full contact information for the editorial office are missing, the editor-in-chief is also the owner/publisher, or the editor-in-chief is also the editor of many other journals, especially in unrelated fields.
7. Copyright and licensing: Policies and notices of copyright (and publishing licence and user licence) are missing or unclear.
8. Author fees: Mandatory fees for publication are not stated or not explained clearly on the journal website, submission system, or the letter of acknowledgement and/or are revealed only in the acceptance letter, as a condition of acceptance.
9. Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: There is no description on how cases of alleged misconduct are handled.
10. Publication ethics: There are no policies on publishing ethics (eg, authorship/contributorship, data sharing and reproducibility, intellectual property, ethical oversight, conflicts of interest, corrections/retractions).
11. Publishing schedule: The periodicity of publication is not indicated and/or the publishing schedule appears erratic from the available journal content.
12. Access: The way(s) in which content is available to readers, and any associated costs, is not stated, and in some cases listed articles are not available at all.
13. Archiving: There is no electronic backup and preservation of access to journal content (despite such claims).
14. Revenue sources: Business models, business partnerships/agreements, or revenue sources are not stated; publishing fees or waiver status are linked to editorial decision making.
15. Advertising: Advertising policy is not given, or advertisements are linked to editorial decision making or are integrated with published content.
16. Direct marketing: Direct marketing is obtrusive and gives misleading or false information