Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Misleading Metrics by Falsas métricas. Un timo para editores – EC3Metrics | Francisca Cuéllar Gragera

0
0

[…] Beall nos alerta de un listado de páginas fraudulentas (36 en total) que generan métricas de impacto a las revistas, y que en muchos casos […]


Comment on Some Strange Goings On at Cureus by Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic)

0
0

The paper “Hypersexuality Addiction and Withdrawal” has now been retracted: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4596082/ because it contained incorrect statements about DSM-V.

Although it will be back, we’re told: “In an effort to unambiguously rectify all errors, the authors have agreed to submit a significantly revised manuscript for subsequent peer review and re-publication.”

This raises the question of why it was corrected to fix some errors, but later retracted for the very same reason. Was the correction not enough?

Comment on Questionable OA Publisher Launches with a Clever Website and 52 New Journals by Kenneth Hall

0
0

I just got a call for papers from this lot: the sender under the name “Hitler Adolf.” As my students would say: srsly?

Comment on Philippines Journal Charges Two Excessive Fees, Exaggerates IF by tekija

0
0

So, 3,500 USD for a minuscule IF of 0.075 translates to 46,666 USD/point; in PLoS One you would get a far better (about 100 times) bargain of IF 3.234 for 1,495 USD or a mere 462 USD/point – and remember that PLoS One in principle accepts any paper that is technically correct irrespective of its importance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLOS_ONE

Comment on Publisher Acts Suspiciously Like OMICS Group by D Web

0
0

I wonder who sold Norm’s email address – probably how I got on these lists, too. AGU maybe?

Comment on Philippines Journal Charges Two Excessive Fees, Exaggerates IF by Derek

0
0

I thought this was a very interesting post. One minor point, you state that submission fees are “rarely charged by scholarly journals”. That is not my experience. I find that many journals (especially Elsevier journals) do charge submission fees. Moreover, journals published by professional associations sometimes have submission fees for non-members that are as high as $200 (e.g., the American Economic Review). However, I agree that posting a lower one on the website is dishonest. Moreover, an additional publication fee of $3500 does seem extreme. The only time I recall seeing such high fees is where open access is only an option and not a requirement (e.g., Economics of Governance charges $3000 to make an article open access but authors have the option of not making it open access).

Comment on Philippines Journal Charges Two Excessive Fees, Exaggerates IF by Ahmad Hassanat

0
0

wow, this would become a multi billion business

Comment on Some Strange Goings On at Cureus by John R. Adler, Jr., M.D.

0
0

Speaking as the Editor-in-Chief of Cureus I can say that the published erratum to the “Hypersexuality” article addressed the vast majority of the incorrect statements around the DSM-V, and under most cirumstances would have been enough to rectify the situation. However, it turns out that the politics surrounding “hypersexuality as an addiction” are particularly vicious leaving little room for honest differences of opinion or inadvertent or even innocuous mistakes. So yes, you could say that the “correction was not enough”. But ultimately the above was my rationale for asking the authors to retract the article…..the newly published article can now be found at:

http://www.cureus.com/articles/3465-hypersexuality-addiction-and-withdrawal-phenomenology-neurogenetics-and-epigenetics

Having been personally pummeled, along with the journal, in the midst of what is largely a political spat, I intend to soon publish a blog detailing more of the story at play here, and illustrating how scientific discourse, can, in the age of social media, be easily held hostage to politics.


Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by Ricardo Beas

0
0

Thank you for uploading this. As it turns out, Dr. Herndon did make some typos in his paper, but he has issued a Public Notice to clarify (he was never given an opportunity to refute the complaints/accusations about his paper). Based on the corrections, the results do not change the outcome of his findings of fact and conclusions: We are being sprayed and one of the substances (maybe the base/vehicle substance) is Coal Fly Ash, a toxic hazardoud waste. Here is his explanation: http://socalskywatch.net/2015/09/26/public-notice-from-j-marvin-herndon-ph-d/

The original paper has been revised to correct errors: http://nuclearplanet.com/ijerph-error_corrected.pdf

— SO FAR FROM CRITICS (example Mick West): SILENCE!!!

Thanks again. Spread the Word, please.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by sou

0
0

Dear Dr. Beall,
I am going to send my article to one of SPIE organization conferences,Please would you give me information about them if they are authentic or predatory?

--- Article Removed ---

0
0
***
***
*** RSSing Note: Article removed by member request. ***
***

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Manuel J. Carvajal

0
0

Dear Dr. Beall:

I would like to inquire about two journals: 1) Social Pharmacy and 2) the Journal of Hospital Administration. Are they legit or predatory? Your assessment is appreciated.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Mohammed

0
0

Dear Jeff,

What is the impact factor of this Journal http://www.iaesjournal.com (International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE)).

Regards

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Mosabber Uddin Ahmed

Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by Jay Reynolds

0
0

Probably the worst part of the paper wasn’t even mentioned in the Editor’s retraction. The paper proceeds from two unsupported assertions,one that the lines Herndon sees could not be ordinary contrails because the atmosphere above San Diego is too warm and two that he is seeing are USAF tanker jets. Both of those premises are easily provable if he had bothered to go beyond a simple assertion and do some investigation. However the facts which would have been revealed, that both of his assertions were false, would have made the paper unnecessary.

The dust has settled on Herndon’s paper and as it has since time began on earth there has and always will be the same elements in dust as there ever has been.


Comment on Philippines Journal Charges Two Excessive Fees, Exaggerates IF by Praveen Chandra

0
0

They are charging too high.I recommend , not to send papers in this journal.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Tesfaye Tebake

0
0

I have a publication in Research journal of Medicinal plant. I have no information about the journal is predator or good. Please can you give any information regarding the journal? Thanks.

Comment on Misleading Metrics by Dr Ayo Gbadeyan

0
0

Prof, help by providing us list of non – predatory, good and high ranking reputable journals. Thank you for the sanity you have brought to Academic Publishing and Scholarship

Comment on David Publishing Company, a Massive Spammer from China by cyberwarllc

0
0

More open source intelligene gathering or OSINT by the P.R.C. against the West and our gullible, trusting traits.

Comment on David Publishing Company, a Massive Spammer from China by JJH

0
0

I wonder why they keep supposedly basing in Illinois. It also used to supposedly operate from an empty lot in Springfield, IL.

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images