Thanks a lot on your recommendation Mr. Jeffrey
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Nguyen Lam Hai
↧
↧
Comment on Fake ISI Aims to Trick the Scholarly Community by J.J.
“you have no idea about Economic markets and systems”
says the person who mistakes the presence of privately owned actors for a free market and is capable of the following absurdity:
“academia is a perfect competition market”
A good read on the specific subject of publishing:
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by wkdawson
You have pointed out before that SCIRP looks troublesomely similar to Scripps.
I do appreciate that you mentioned that “The authors of the good articles are being victimized by the publisher’s policy of publishing pseudoscientific articles…”
There are people who desire to be good scholars in Asia. I have had both Chinese and Japanese who have asked me to help them with there manuscripts, and I can see that some of them really do care about communicating, and just struggle with the language and the cultural barriers. However, there are also people who seem to think that if one journal rejects the paper, they just send it to another until it does get accepted. So you have good and bad scholars in every nook and cranny in the world and you cannot say who the good and bad are until you start seeing a pattern of bad scholarship,
Further, not all of us who have published with open access have chosen to do so because we want to hid something, rather, we want everyone to have access to it. if there is an agenda, it is that we have lived in places where it was difficult to get papers because many universities in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa don’t have an adequate budget for extensive library access to all the essential journals. Admittedly, it appears that people are reading less and less and merely citing what was acquired from an abstract if that. Some citations are just copied from other citation lists. Nevertheless, there are people out there who actually _try_ to read the papers in their field — though it is obvious that no one can keep up anymore with everything. It is most annoying to find that I cannot read a paper in my field because the library doesn’t have downloadable access for that article. So this is where OA has its strength. What you point out in you blog is what the weakness is.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by KEHINDE Falola
I would like to know if this journal is on the list of predator journalInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied SciencesThanks. Falola
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Mouffada
Dear Jeffrey Beall,
Thank you for your very intersting information. I publish in a journal of one of these publishers the journal is really peer reviewed (two anonymous reviewers) and it is open access I don’t pay and the paper is published and the issue is online. Now they ask for payment what to do? Also some of journals of these publishers are indexed in Scopus how to know if they are predatory journals or not?
Thank you in advance.
Best Regards.
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
This sounds like the practices of OMICS Publishing Group. They quickly accept and publish articles, and then they send an expensive bill.
If you do not want to publish in this journal, I recommend that you send them an email and say, “I would like to withdraw my article.” They will use many tricks to get you to pay, so be prepared.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by Jeffrey Beall
Falola, yes, the <em>International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences</em> is on my list <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here</a>. I recommend that you not submit your work to this journal.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by herr doktor bimler
I am disappointed that Scirp have an “Advances in Internet of Things” rather than “Advances in Internet of Cats”.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by Maytham
Really conclusion and some text in introduction of this article are bs, what happen to science, I would like say if a student searching for topic on HIV and he finds such bs, what is fate of science ?
↧
↧
Comment on A list of Print-on-demand publishers, self-publishing/”Vanity presses” and other non-traditional publishers for librarians and authors by Penny D. Weigand, Esq./JD
Bellissima Publishing, LLC is NOT a self-publisher. Please make correction immediately. We are a traditional publisher with POD print and offset capability, and offer standard royalties, covering all costs of publication. You need to make sure your facts are correct before you publish statements recklessly. Please remove this incorrect reference immediately.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by Sudesh Kumar
I am very critical of Jeffrey Beall and his criteria but having read the above article, I firmly support his views in this post.
In my career I have seen many patients being saved by cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In the above article the authors suggest THEIR novel method of cardiopulmonary resuscitation by placing the patient in a specific position and…..PERUSING THE BRACHIAL VEIN BY SERUM, VIA IV DRIP, AT A MEDIUM FLOW RATE.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is an emergency procedure and there are only few minutes to save the patient. Where the hell will the physician get SERUM, that also matched, unless we want to give the patient a transfusion reaction as well? I wonder if the authors will prefer this new methods applied on themselves, if unfortunately a need arises.
I almost died when I read this: “Lymph node…it variably acts as a disinfectant sprayer on the lymph and blood fluids, which are naturally and permanently contaminated by exogenous factors such as water, food, air.” – Air of all things? and “disinfectant sprayer” for water, food and air!!! – can i get some lymph nodes to disinfect my car?
And to read that “HIV is not etiologically involved in AIDS but found in AIDS conjuncturally” when billions of dollars have been spent in proving otherwise…what to say???
This is not junk science by authors but DANGEROUS science bordering on INSANITY.
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by Jeffrey Beall
AIDS denialism is not mere “noise” as you state. The indexed article is branded as a scientific article and indexed in a database that purports to be a scholarly index. Inexperienced users might naively accept the paper’s statements as honest science. It’s great that you can tell the difference, but not all users can.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Charles Gustaff
Dear Jeffrey Beall.
Thank you for your very interesting information. I could not find in your list, but my colleagues suggested me to publish my manuscript there. I would like to have your comments about the International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences (IJFAS): http://www.ripublication.com/irph/ijfas.htm and the International Journal of Agriculture Food Science & Technology (IJAFST): http://www.ripublication.com/ijafst.htm. Both journals are published by RIP (http://www.ripublication.com/). This publisher is also publish numerous scientific journals. Are they predatory journals and publisher or qualified?
Regards
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
Charles,
Basically RIP is not on my list because it's not an open-access publisher. I limit my work to OA. Please see <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/03/18/greedy-indian-publisher/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this blog post</a> I wrote about this publisher in March, 2014. I would recommend that you find a better venue for your work. In this one, you will have to pay to have your work put up behind a paywall.
↧
Comment on Beware of Spam Email With Offers to Promote Your Research by Josie R
I received one of these emails yesterday. I was almost convinced I should reply – mostly because they do not name a cost for publication anywhere in the email – but a colleague suggested I google first. I think they’ve figured out they get a much higher response rate if they don’t say anything about a price… The email was well written and the site it linked to was polished and professional-looking.
↧
Comment on Bogus Journal Accepts Profanity-Laced Anti-Spam Paper by What is peer review really? (part 7 – an amusing aside) | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
[…] couple of weeks ago, a funny story came out about a peer-reviewed journal accepting a “paper” which consists of nothing […]
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by J.J.
I like how the only reference in the ‘paper’ is to an earlier exercise in lunacy by the same author.
↧
↧
Comment on The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science by Zedi
I would like to share my experience as a reviewer for a SCRIP journal.
Despite being perfectly aware of the bad reputation of this publisher, I accepted to review a paper for them, just to verify the regularity of the review process by myself.
The paper I had to review was not pseudo-science, but its quality was definitely bad. It looked like an old paper written in the mid ’90s and long forgotten in a closet: old fashioned techniques, low quality images, conclusions unsopported by genome sequence (I guess the reason for that is the the genome sequence was not available when the paper was written several years ago). I believe that the authors, having probably experienced multiple rejections, thought that they had a chance to publish this old unpublished work in a low-quality journal.
I strongly advised to reject the paper, providing very low scores for all the fields provided in the reviewer’s comment scoring sheet (SCRIP uses a ridiculous 10-star rating system for a series of aspects, which include “creativeness”).
To my surprise, after a couple of weeks I received another mail from the eitorial office with the revised paper attached (actually almost no meaningful modification was made to improve it). I confirmed my rejection reccomendation and complained about that fact that such a crappy paper was even considered for revision.
Here is the response I got:
“[…] paper submission recently may be influenced by the holidays is not as good as before. The number of papers submitted these two months is declining. We have to consider the number and quality of manuscripts, thus we have gave the author a chance to revise the paper. […] By the way, could you please kindly submit or recommend some papers to our journal AJMB? We would be greatly grateful to you for recommending AJMB to your colleagues and friends.”
What can we learn from this story?
1) peer review does actually take place in SCIP journals, but the editorial office will do anything to publish a paper regardless of the reviewer reccomendation.
2) they don’t care about paper quality, all they care about are the revenues from publishing fees.
↧
Comment on A list of Print-on-demand publishers, self-publishing/”Vanity presses” and other non-traditional publishers for librarians and authors by Lara Seven Phillips
You are listed in the POD section, and the majority of your backlist seems to be work by your nom-de-plume Penelope Dyan, which pretty much fits the very definition of “self-publishing. The difference between Bellissima and a traditional non-POD publisher is obvious from the content and appearance of your website. I stand by my inclusion of Bellissima as a POD/self-publishing venture – Lara Seven Phillips.
↧
Comment on The OMICS Publishing Group’s Empire is Expanding by Jeffrey Beall
Many of the editorial board members are actually victims of OMICS. This publisher regularly adds names to its editorial boards and conference organizing committees without permission and then refuses to remove the names upon request or takes a very long time to do so
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
