Terrific, most of those criteria are ones I already use. I don’t agree with number six. Also, regarding your “give details” criteria, one cannot take anything predatory publishers say at face value. They all claim to follow established standards but really do not. Are you affiliated with a publisher?
Comment on Predatory Publisher Organizes Conference Using Same Name as Legitimate Conference by Jeffrey Beall
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
No.
↧
Comment on Appeals by otistd
At least for mdpi, which I don’t represent- you should make an updated comment I think at the very least regarding why they are on your list.
http://oaspa.org/conclusions-from-oaspa-membership-committee-investigation-into-mdpi/
Or do you feel that OASPA’s investigation based on your own assertions is insufficient in it’s scope or conclusions? Have you discussed with OASPA?
I also have a paper in an mdpi journal special issue- which was guest edited by a pretty respectable scientist- and so I have experience their peer review and editorial review. It was actually pretty comparable to most of the more established Journals in which I have published.
↧
Comment on About the Author by Georgica » Where do we publish?
[…] დენვერში ბიბლიოთეკარი ჯეფრი ბილი. მის ვებსაიტზე თავმოყრილია […]
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Georgica » Where do we publish?
[…] სია, ასევე მოცემულია მათი შერჩევის კრიტერიუმები. თუკი კარგად გაეცნობით ამ […]
↧
↧
Comment on Appeals by Genaro V Japos
In response to Otistd, the criteria of Dr Beall on Predatory Publishers already cover the OASPA and COPE standards and even more than those. The parameters are numerous and they are credible as framework of understanding what constitutes journal publishing quality. These criteria are good inputs in raising the bar for editorial policies and procedures. Thus, even if OASPA clears a publishing member, it does not mean it has met the criteria of quality set by Dr Beall. This is his legacy to the literature on quality of publishers and journals.
↧
Comment on Appeals by otistd
To be clear are you speaking for Professor Beal? I have read the criteria he has posted- so I’m aware that there are more criteria than adhering to OASPA’s code of conduct. But that is not really a substantive answer to any of the issues I raised. I disclosed that I have a paper in one of their journals- which is why it caught my interest to see it- so I searched and found the history which is that Dr. Beall added them to his list with a detailed explanation. OASPA has since posted that they did a review- specifically into the issues he raised and referenced his post. It stands to reason he may have discussed it with them as well- but I didn’t see any follow up on this site posted- though I could have missed it. I’m wondering if he even knew about OASPA’s review. To be honest I think their post is not very detailed- but I also think it is a substantial development that deserves some follow up on Dr. Beall’s part. To be totally honest, I am withholding judgement about the Dr. Beall’s list, but it does in my mind raise a lot of questions. I recognize that Dr. Beall is the ultimate authority when it comes to what he writes in his blog. Although that in itself raises a warning bell in my head- and I do recognize as well that he has a panel for appeals.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Abhimanyu Sarin
Hi Mr. Beall,
Thanks a ton for the input. I was not aware of the amount of corruption that existed amongst even scientific journals.
It would be awfully kind of you if you could tell why AIRCC (Academy & Industry Research Collaboration Center) has a bad name. Also, are the journals published cited as scholarly journals or not ?
This is my first time publishing (i’m an undergrad) but I would like to make sure my research is valued and further used by the scientific community
Thanks again :)
↧
Comment on Predatory Publisher Organizes Conference Using Same Name as Legitimate Conference by Weekend reads: DIY peer review, wildly exaggerated breakthroughs, and how to commit fraud without being caught | Retraction Watch
[…] predatory publisher has organized a conference with the same name as a legitimate conference, reports Jeffrey […]
↧
↧
Comment on New OA Publisher Launches with 107 Journals, Fakes Association with Elsevier by Ole, Ole!
I fully support the inclusion of this “publisher” on Beall’s list. My primary concern is how such publishers affect plant science. I thus identified two journals which are currently publishing by this publisher and have identified the following problems:
SPRJAR:
a) The current issue (see cover) of May 2014 claims that it is volume 9, volume 22. Yet, the back issue button is not working, which suggests that in fact volumes 1-8 do not exist, and that the publisher is lying about the past content, or irresponsibly not showing the content of volumes 1-8. The cover style design is very similar to that used by Academic Journals from Nigeria.
b) Who peer reviewed the first three articles? There is no editor board, so did accounting do the work?
c) Take a look at a typical PDF file:
http://sprintjournals.com/pdf/SPRJAR-02-115.pdf
The e-mails and telephone/fax appear on the header of every page. Absolute lack of sense and professionalism.
d) In this journal, only three articles, from Sudan and Kenya, very weak analyses that most likely would not have been able to publish elsewhere. But, this is how it starts.
e) None of these buttons work:
Editorial Policies
Publication Ethics
Instructions for Authors
Reviewers Guidelines
Submit Manuscripts
Editors
Articles
Archive
Track Your Manuscript
Another journal with a very similar title, making SPRJAR redundant, is Sprint Journal of Agricultural SCIENCE (SPRJAS).
The problems are identical to those in SPRJAR, with a bit more spice:
f) Two papers by Shrivastava are a clear case of salami slicing. OA has no page limits, so splitting one method into two data sets for two papers to increase the number of publications is of concern. Perhaps with two papers the first author could then obtain his/her PhD?
g) A Pakistani/German collaboration (http://sprintjournals.com/pdf/SPRJAS-02-117.pdf) fails to show the use of other DNA barcoding studies (e.g., Jeanson et al. 2011; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3219495/) making this a snub paper. Snub publishing can threaten the integrity of science since it represents the inaccurate representation of the literature.
h) Figures of the Nunes et al. (Brazil) paper (http://sprintjournals.com/pdf/SPRJAS-02-129.pdf) plucked straight from the Nunes (2012) PhD thesis (compare Fig 3a and 3b on page 5 of the SPRJAS paper with Fig. 5a and 5b of the thesis, page 49 of the PDF (http://www.bibliotecaflorestal.ufv.br/bitstream/handle/123456789/6639/dissertacao_Shirley%20Tavares%20Nunes.pdf?sequence=1) simply translated.
↧
Comment on OMICS Goes from “Predatory Publishing” to “Predatory Meetings” by RUKMINI
Be careful with the international conferences organized by science plus. They organize some conferences until the end of 2014 There are a fake conference or a scam. I call the hotel are included for the conference but they (the hotel) says there is no conference for. I contacted the advisory board, everything is fictional. So please do not be influenced to join all programs organized by science plus. Especially for paying the fee registration for the conference. It’s true a fake conference and a scam from science plus (organizer).
↧
Comment on Icelandic Journal Latest Victim of Journal Hijacking by Mohamed Hamdy
Dear
I get 3 acceptance from Jokull . and when i sent the money with my visa it get back . Please give me any method to transfer the money
Dr zeinab
↧
Comment on Icelandic Journal Latest Victim of Journal Hijacking by Jeffrey Beall
I recommend that you NOT send money to Jokull. This is a hijacked journal.
Please withdraw your articles and find a journal that is authentic and not hijacked.
↧
↧
Comment on Impact Factor Confusion: Spam Emails Mislead Researchers by Ole, Ole!
Journal Issues (publisher’s name) invites scientists to review papers and claims a false impact factor. The journal is not listed on JCR’s list. E-mail dated August 20, 2014:
“Dear Colleague,
It is a great pleasure to invite you to peer review the research topic ENTITLED [redacted].
Find the Abstract below: [redacted]
I know I can count on you to peer-review this manuscript and send it back to us within the stipulated time of 5 days.
Attached to this mail is the Original manuscript, Guideline for Reviewer and Guide for Authors.
However, you are free to recommend/forward it to any of your friend or colleague should the attached manuscript is not in your field of interest.
Thank you for your attention and consideration in this important matter.
Kindly acknowledge the receipt of this mail.
I appreciate your effort.
Best regards,
Prof. Hail .K. Shannag
Editor
International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research
E-mail: ijaprpeerreview@journalissues.org
http://www.journalissues.org/IJAPR/
ISSN 2350-1561
Impact Factor = 1.2668
Index copernicus value:6.18″
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Dr D B NIKUMBH
Hello Mr Jeff ,,,,KINDLY TELL ME THE ACTUAL MEANING OF INDEX MEDICUS AND NATIONAL JOURNALS ,,,,,,AS IN MEDICAL PROMOTION IN INDIA/MCI GUIDELINES STATES THIS…..THE PUBLICATIONS IN INDEX MEDICUS OR NATIONAL JOURNALS ……MEANS WHAT??
↧
Comment on New OA Publisher Launches with 107 Journals, Fakes Association with Elsevier by wimcrusio
Note that the image of the cover of the Oral etc journal has “ScienceDirect” at the top, claiming another connection with Elsevier…
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
Index Medicus was a print index to medical literature that stopped publishing in 2004. It is now essentially replaced by PubMed. PubMed is selective — it does not include all medical journals. Therefore, some look at a journal’s being included in PubMed as a mark of quality.
↧
↧
Comment on New OA Publisher Launches with 107 Journals, Fakes Association with Elsevier by The Iron Chemist
This is more like open abcess publishing. This sort of crap is just going to continue until (A) university administrators actually take the time to assess their faculty’s work and (B) more of the ethical researchers amongst us stop acting like they just fell off the turnip truck. If you’re naive enough to get suckered by one of these outfits in this day and age, you probably shouldn’t publish at all. I hate to be mean, but come on.
↧
Comment on New OA Publisher Launches with 107 Journals, Fakes Association with Elsevier by Apparently banned?
That universities should be employing armies of administrators to “actually take the time to assess their faculty’s work” is an insane view. Assessment of research is not something that can be done by non-specialists, and universities already suffer from an over-abundance of administrative staff relative to teachers and researchers.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Kwaku Ahenkora
Could you provide me with information on the credibility of the following open access journals: International Journal of Advances in Management and Economics; International Journal of Business, Management and Economic Research. Thanks in advance
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
