The authors should be fined and even the authencity of the work reported needs to be checked once again. The new regime, where publication are being given more weightage has led to this type of frauds and individuals who cannot even have an independent thinking are publishing research papers.When a form has to be filled while submitting the research work that this work has not been published or not been communicaed for publication, how this mistake has been done on part of the authors. I think in our system, if one really starts investigation, more than 90% of the research papers will be fake.
Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Dr. Rajesh K Anand
↧
↧
Comment on Two “Institutes” That Want Your Money by Jeffrey Beall
No.
↧
Comment on Bogus New OA Publisher Association Attempts to Compete with OASPA by Martin Rundkvist
Haha, I wonder what a “Perfect Editorial Board” is.
↧
Comment on Bogus New OA Publisher Association Attempts to Compete with OASPA by hoicsi
If it exists, it can not be perfect. So for a chance to be perfect, it must be non-existent, and i think at least some predatory journals have such an editorial board.
↧
Comment on Bogus New OA Publisher Association Attempts to Compete with OASPA by Schmuck
“Serials should not be irregular
Any previously published matter should be not publish by the serial”
What is a serial??
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by George
I’m really concerned to see that Hindawi is not included this year after being under investigation this year. In Hindawi is clear that you pay to get something published. There are no anonymous reviewers. What else is needed to define them a predatory publisher?
↧
Comment on Should Journalists Cite Material from Predatory Journals? by Robin Hood
Exactly Shawn. That is why the scientific community is now in serious trouble, I believe. Journalism and scientific journalism is, in my opinion, already so biased and opinionated, that it actually doesn’t matter to the academic community. If we look at main-stream US “journalism”, it is evident that each one is pushing for a socio-political agenda. So, scientists should always be suspicious of journalism overall, because most journalists are not scientists and thus have no understanding, in fact, of how it works. The underlying risks that Jeff is referring to are, however, more important for scientists. And allow me to explain using an example. Imagine a scientist does a search on Google or Yahoo for a toic, e.g. salmon eggs. Maybe some OA PDFs appear in the first 2-3 pages of Yahoo or Google, and, because the scientist is too lazy, or too irresponsible to conduct a thorough search on “respected” data-bases, or maybe because the scientist is unaware of the predatory nature of many OA operations, that predatory paper on salmon eggs slips into the reference list of a paper that might be eventually published by a non-predatory publisher. Suddenly, you have a situation where valid publishers, at least those that abide by fairly well established industry codes, are actually supporting predatory OA publishers by “validating” them in reference lists. Thisis the immediate imapct. The mid-term impact which is now becoming evident over 2006-2013, is that papers from predatory publishers can, in the case of one publisher, now start to account for as much as 15% of all references in reference lists (suing Jeff’s lists as the industry standard). Most of these predators have a long-term vision, and if you and others haven’t figured this out yet, then you will never figure it out. Predators are seeking, as a long-term goal, to be massively referenced in as many journals as possible. Then, along comes Thomson Reuters’ spiders and automatic bots, which are simply robots that scour the internet and data-bases in search of key-words, and develop an Impact Factor based on number of times a journal is referenced. Before you know it, clearly predatory publishers, with unqualified editor boards, fraudulent actions, rubbish and non-sensical papers and no scientific quality, quality control or transparency, suddenly appear with an Impact Factor. This is, in the fraudster’s eyes, the ultimate validation. And we, the scientific community, give it to them on a platter. Thus, the first thing that needs to take place is EXACTLY an embargo on clear predators, and their papers should be BANNED from being included in reference lists of valid journals. Of course, many “valid” publishers and journals are themselves predators, in different ways, so soon it will be difficult to differentiate valid from invalid predators, and OA from print predators. Science is in crisis, no doubt. But radical measures like banning and embargos might be the only way to force the hands of fraudsters who only have one objective in mind: profit (by hook or by crook).
↧
Comment on Two Predatory Bloopers by Robin Hood
Dear Eponine. Jeff does not have Inderscience listed on the list of predatory publishers. You claim that many “bogus” conferences are published by this publsher. You cannot make claims without proof. Prove it.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Peter Nonacs
I did publish this year in a Hindawi journal. It was anonymously reviewed and and our experience was professional. The journal is Psyche, which has had a long history of being published by the Cambridge Entomological Society. Apparently the rights to this journal were bought/transferred to Hindawi. Again, this raises the problem of apparently legitimate journals having a publisher that may or may not be partially predatory.
↧
↧
Comment on Bogus New OA Publisher Association Attempts to Compete with OASPA by Peter Matthews
I work for a museum in Japan where we use both ISBN and ISSN numbers for monographs published within a series. This allows librarians to file the monographs all together on one shelf, or seperately according to the Dewey system for subjects and authors.
For our bulletin, in which the issues are not monographs, we use only an ISSN number
↧
Comment on Three New Questionable Open-Access Publishers by pbp
You can see The “Science publishing group” had changed their logo from google crome style to another one..
↧
Comment on Bogus New OA Publisher Association Attempts to Compete with OASPA by Peter Matthews
Hi Schmuck,
Serials are any kind of publication that is appears in a series, i.e. a sequence over time. Formal academic journals are the most common kind of serial discussed in this blog. They usually appear at regular intervals, but when they struggle to find contributors and funding, they may fall behind and appear irregularly. Less formal publications, such as the newsletter of a small research group, are not really expected to be regular.
P.
↧
Comment on Should Journalists Cite Material from Predatory Journals? by Shawn
The point of my post was not “against” embargo, my position is that it is not practical. A total ban is not realistic because vanity publishers have learned to mask their operations to make verification very difficult.
What is the procedure that you suggest for journalist to verify vanity junk? Do you always refer to this or some other list? What if it isn’t on a list? How do you verify that peer review actually takes place? Do you review every single article ever published for that journal?
A professional journalist does 2 things: Research & Disclose. Yes, many of the science journalists are not qualified to write science articles, and not all journalists/contributors/writers follow best practice. The point is, if they failed at research and disclosure, the fundamental basis of all journalism, what chance is there that they honor an embargo?
↧
↧
Comment on Open-Access Publisher Launches with 355 New Journals by naser
I wonder whether this guy could even manage to register ISSN for these journals. When a person wants to handle so many journals at the same time, he will end up publishing Plagiarized papers and his website will quickly be in trouble since people start sending complains web hosting firms. Just wait and see the first few papers.
Thanks Jeff for carefully monitoring scientific society.
Naser
↧
Comment on Open-Access Publisher Launches with 355 New Journals by Robin Hood
The ISSN is in a large part to blame. Corruption does not start at the bottom., It starts at the top. No quality control. Makes you wonder what the ISSN benefits from being associated with this plague. Contact your national ISSN Center today, anonymously, or not, and launch a formal complaint and demand a formal explanation. Time to make the REAL fraudsters sweat. If the ISSN did not give these predatory OA publishers the tool to validate their journals, maybe they would find it more difficult to attract authors. The equation is simple. Clean up the rot at the top and you will see an instant filtering down of cleansing at the bottom of the food chain.
↧
Comment on Open-Access Publisher Launches with 355 New Journals by Ben
While scrolling down to the comment form I was also thinking about ISSNs :)
I noticed that 56 and 57 appear to be duplicates (“International Journal of Anthropology”).
↧
Comment on Open-Access Publisher Launches with 355 New Journals by Jeffrey Beall
Ben, thanks for catching that. I crossed it out, but I think I will not change my title.
↧
↧
Comment on Open-Access Publisher Launches with 355 New Journals by naser
There are many similar cases of OA publishers who claim they are running over 100 journals but when we check the journals’ content we see that only a few have actual contents. Look at IDOSI for example, idosi.org, they claim to run nearly 100 journals but fewer than 10 journals are active and the rest of them are almost dead. So the moral story is that this person will end up having the same future and in this particular case the link of publishers will soon be in trouble.
These days, absorbing some professionals as editorial board, attracting interested researchers to submit papers are not as easy as it was. In most academic agencies such as universities, people do not give any credit to these kinds of publishers any more.
I think this wave of internet scam will disappear from OA publishers soon.
Naser
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Laureano Ralon
Reblogged this on <a href="http://figureground.ca/2013/01/16/12110/" rel="nofollow">Figure/Ground Communication™</a>.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Hilary Carey
What about this kind of approach? I do not need to pay publishers to accept my work and I wonder why I am being pressured (I was approached multiple times with the same request) to publish in this journal which does not appear in Australia’s list of approved journals. It does not sound like a scam – just an imposition. And they ask for money.
Hilary Carey
[Dear X]
We contacted you on 22 November 2012, regarding a Special Issue on
“Expanding the Study of Religion and Missions”to be published in
Religions (ISSN 2077-1444, http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions).
On behalf of the Guest Editor, Dr. Jennifer Graber, we would
like to renew our invitation for you to contribute a full research
paper or an outstanding long review for peer-review and
possible publication in the following Special Issue:
Special Issue: Expanding the Study of Religion and Missions
Website: http://www.mdpi.com/si/religions/religion_mission/
Guest Editor: Dr. Jennifer Graber
Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 May 2013
If you decide to contribute, please let us know, and send us your
manuscript now or up until the deadline. Submitted papers should
not have been published previously, nor be under consideration
for publication elsewhere. We also encourage authors to send us
their tentative title and short abstract by e-mail for approval to the
Editorial Office at: religions@mdpi.com.
In case you cannot meet the deadline, please feel free to contact us.
This Special Issue will be fully open access. Open access (unlimited
and free access by readers) increases publicity and promotes more
frequent citations as indicated by several studies. Open access is
supported by the authors and their institutes.
More information is available at http://www.mdpi.com/about/openaccess/.
The Article Processing Charges (APC) are 300 CHF for well
prepared manuscripts. In addition, a fee of 250 CHF may apply
if English editing or extensive revisions must be undertaken by the
Editorial Office.
More information can be found at http://www.mdpi.com/about/apc/.
Please visit the website of Instructions for Authors before submitting
a paper at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions/instructions/.
Manuscripts should be submitted through the online manuscript submission
and editorial system at http://www.mdpi.com/user/manuscripts/upload/.
Religions (ISSN 2077-1444) is an international, open access
scholarly journal publishing peer-reviewed studies of religious
thought and practice. It is available online to promote critical,
hermeneutical, historical, and constructive conversations. It aims
to serve the interests of a wide range of thoughtful readers and
academic scholars of religion, as well as theologians, philosophers,
social scientists, anthropologists, psychologists, neuroscientists
and others interested in the multidisciplinary study of religions.
MDPI publishes several peer-reviewed, open access journals listed at
http://www.mdpi.com/. The Editorial Board members, including several
Nobel Laureates (http://www.mdpi.com/about/nobelists/), are all leading
active scholars. All MDPI journals maintain rapid, yet rigorous, peer-
review, manuscript handling and editorial processes. MDPI journals have
increased their impact factors, see “2011 Newly Released Impact
Factors”, http://www.mdpi.com/about/announcements/235/.
In case of questions, please contact the Editorial Office at:
religions@mdpi.com
We are looking forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards,
Wanda Gruetter
On behalf of the Guest Editor
Dr. Jennifer Graber
The University of Texas at Austin
Department of Religious Studies
Burdine 406 – Mail Code A3700
Austin
Texas 78712
USA
Website: http://www.jennifergraber.net
E-Mail: jgraber@austin.utexas.edu
–
Wanda Gruetter
MDPI AG
Kandererstrasse 25
CH-4057 Basel, Switzerland
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
E-Mail: gruetter@mdpi.com
http://www.mdpi.com/
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
