Dr.Beall, Let me thank you first for moderating comments here. By this you have ensured decent talk. The article above is a perfect example of ‘exploitation’ of the concept of OA by an author and I am sure it is going to serve some ‘purpose’ only for the author himself. This author would show this article to some and even become the Minister for Higher Education. This is certainly not the concern of Physicists. I believe most OA authors belong to this category. They know they bunk and need a junk to accommodate them. For now, I think creating an awareness among scholars is the best bet rather than expecting these publishers vanish in the near future. What do you think is the ‘impact factor’ of your blogs? I mean how far does it reach? It needs to be certainly very high. Even if I were not aware of this wonderful page of yours, I dont think I would have fallen prey. There are millions of scholars who are smarter than me. So, there is no real danger.
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by R V Krishnakumar
↧
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by Colin Barron
In reply to Dr Krishnakumar, there is a big danger. A number of lecturers at my University have published in journals listed on Jeffrey Beall’s list. When it is pointed out to them that publishing articles in these journals may harm their careers, their responses are usually one of 3:
1 they are under great pressure to publish, especially if they are seeking promotion
2 lists like Jeffrey Beall’s are merely “Western plots” to undermine the research of lecturers in developing countries
3 even if an article has little or no academic merit, young researchers need to be encouraged
Colin Barron
↧
Comment on List of Publishers by All That Glitters Is Not Gold, But Is It Diamond? | SCRIPTed
[...] http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/ (accessed 8 Dec [...]
↧
Comment on Respected Swiss Journal Hijacked by Unknown Criminals by dianabuja
There is also the current case of the site of quite a good egyptological open access journal that has been stolen – but apparently for political reasons in Egypt! -
http://www.kv64.info/2012/12/update-regarding-egyptological.html
“Egyptological will be unavailable for the forseeable future. It has been targeted by a professional hacking group as part of an onslaught on Egypt-related web sites during the current unrest in Egypt.Although we have been in negotiations with the hackers, which seemed to be going well, they have now announced their intention of resuming hostilities against us. They apparently see Egyptology sites such as ours as representing a form of political threat.Until we have been able to assess the level of damage inflicted upon our backup solution, and have been able to devise a new strategy for the future security of Egyptological, our site will remain unavailable…
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by R V Krishnakumar
I agree Colin. But I dont think we can buy these ‘reasons’. Any reason other than “I got tricked” may not be a honest one. Thats the reason I think ‘Pevention is better than Regret’ as far as OA publications are concerned. Also, I consider those who come out with the above reasons are ‘weaklings’ and Science would certainly not given in to them.
↧
↧
Comment on List of Publishers by Integritas akademik dan publikasi internasional « Melakukan Publikasi Internasional
[...] or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers’. Yang tertarik sila, lirik daftarnya di sini. Daftar kriteria yang dibuat oleh Beall dalam menentukan penerbit yang masuk ke dalam daftar [...]
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Integritas akademik dan publikasi internasional « Melakukan Publikasi Internasional
[...] yang dibuat oleh Beall dalam menentukan penerbit yang masuk ke dalam daftar tersebut dapat dilirik di sini. Anda boleh setuju, boleh tidak. Tentu saja, hal ini masih bisa diperdebatkan. Tetapi, kalau toh [...]
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Integritas akademik dan publikasi internasional « Melakukan Publikasi Internasional
[...] or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers’. Yang tertarik sila, lirik daftarnya di sini. Daftar ini memuat 244 penerbit ‘predator’ dengan puluhan judul jurnal per penernit dan [...]
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by Atanu Chatterjee
Krishnakumar , how can be you so prejudiced?
Please clarify what you meant, “I believe most OA authors belong to this category”???
↧
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by Colin Barron
I am not suggesting, Dr Krishnakumar, that these responses should be accepted. What they indicate is that the people who make such comments, may be smart, but they lack academic integrity and academic rigour. This is alarming and dangerous because these qualities are required to maintain academic research standards and to drive knowledge forward. Some of the people who have made comments like those in my first post are professors or aspire to be professors in the near future. They will be sitting on promotion boards. If they are prepared to accept low quality journals and low quality articles, they are not going to challenge them on the boards. The reputation of the authors and the university will suffer in the long run.
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by R V Krishnakumar
I should have been more clear by saying, “most OA authors who publish in Beall’s predators”. Is it OK, Atanu.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Ahmad
what about INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOASSAYS?
↧
Comment on Combining Fake Journals with Fake Conferences: Global Business & International Management Conference by Alex H
Interesting (and effective) method. I completely understand the busines logic of filling up newly started journals with conference papers; as it provides the much-neded visibility and content for the journal’s first issues and also lure researchers to submit a well-written paper to the conference. There is another publisher, started recently in Slovakia, Central Europe which operates in a similar way. Thomson s.r.o., the commercial publishing company behind Sci-Pub Scientific Publishing service http://www.sci-pub.com is backing up its 7 new journals with a virtual “conference” (The 1 st Global Virtual Conference 2013, http://www.gv-conference.com/ ), providing the opportunity for researchers to not give a presentation at all and still get a line in their CVs for the conference participation and another for a journal article (which is, actually, their accepted conference paper).
↧
↧
Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by R.V. Krishnakumar
I understand, Colin. Still, there is no big danger for Science, but to the reputation of Institutions. Journals, when accepting papers do not go into the reputation of institutions but quality of content. I do not mean to disagree with your points. When I commented, “there is no real danger”, I meant Science. None of my teachers were Ph.D.s when I was in college. Yet, they took care of every laboratory session as if it were a space mission and taught us as if the world would end the next hour. The students benefited and thus the Institution which then had a very high ranking in the State. There may be some who can do good teaching and there may be some who can do good research and some both. What if I am not among the top 100 researchers, I still have an option to be in top 100 teachers. My message is simple : “Try best to teach good and burn the brain a little for research. Teach well and walk with pride. If you have made out a small publication out of the little (or no!) infrastructure that is accessible, remember Archimedes”.
↧
Comment on Respected Swiss Journal Hijacked by Unknown Criminals by Rens W. van der Heijden
As an avid promotor of online privacy and the protection of websites against censorship, but also a young researcher, this thing really makes it difficult for me to choose sides.
On the one side, the very idea that an arbitrary website can simply be deleted is one that invokes strong emotions for me. Such censorship is almost unthinkable in our current climate of internet freedom. The selective removal of websites by governments (or corporations) is an extremely controversial topic that touches on the very esssence of constitutions in many countries.
On the other hand, this type of abuse (as well as worse cases, such as websites serving malware) is unacceptable. If I can’t trust the web to serve me legitimate pages, how can I get any research done? Where will I find information? One potential good approach is for us researchers to simply take note of the publisher websites and bookmark them. However, this still exposes the public to a variety of pseudo-scientific material.
In conclusion I would say that awareness (through blogs such as yours and other sources of information) is the key towards avoiding these journals. Limited legal action should be possible by forcing hosters to remove such malicious websites: however, I fear that the legal process required is too long to guarantee that we will not see similar problems in the future.
↧
Comment on Combining Fake Journals with Fake Conferences: Global Business & International Management Conference by Jeffrey Beall
I recently added that publisher to my list. Thanks.
↧
Comment on List of Publishers by Scholarly journal publishing – Things turn nasty « Roddy Macleod's Blog
[...] a hard working librarian at University of Colorado Denver called Jeffrey Beall who maintains Beall’s List: Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers. This is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access publishers. There’s carefully [...]
↧
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Scholarly journal publishing – Things turn nasty « Roddy Macleod's Blog
[...] is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access publishers. There’s carefully prepared criteria for determining entries on the list. I’ve found the list very useful when trying to assess [...]
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Jeffrey Beall
The publisher of this journal, ebiosciences, has been added to my list. Thaks.
↧
Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Rahim Khan,India
A charge for retraction….wow….there are even funnier charges though….like manuscript reviewing charge
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
