What has this got to do with the topic of this posting?
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by simonbatterbury
↧
↧
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by Nils
Allen writes
“As a proud author of two Frontiers articles and former frequent reviewer, these issues compounded with a general poor perception of the journal recently led me to stop all publication activities at Frontiers outlets”.
For a description of the “issues”, see the very first paragraph of the blog entry.
↧
Comment on Appeals by aakash
Respected sir,
I want know about this journal
1) IJETR
2) IJIREEICE
3) IRJET
↧
Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
All three of these journals are included on my list <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here</a>, and I recommend that you not submit any papers to them.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Open-Access Journal Articles and Predatory Publishers – Leadership and Organizations
[…] Beall’s List of Predatory Open Access Publishers […]
↧
↧
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by herr doktor bimler
Someone in the paper’s PubPeer thread linked to this recent article by Janecko:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1891444/
Which is basically “cancer, fractals, chaos theory, yadda yadda, cancer can be cured by persuading cancer cells to turn non-cancerous”.
The journal in that case is “International Journal of Medical Sciences” — an OA publisher of uncertain provenance (they operate out of an Australian forwarding address in an attempt to be Western), who have also given us “Theranostics” (!) and the “Journal of Genomics”.
I am tempted to send it to Orac at Resp.Insolence in the hope of winding him up.
↧
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by herr doktor bimler
Another recent Frontiers paper, published posthumously by recently-deceased autism-cure-scammer Bradstreet and his mockademic colleagues:
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2015.00485/full
It doesn’t say much, being an attempt to claim that recent work published in Nature was a replication of an earlier exercise in quackery from the same cabal (also pumped out through Frontiers); and is noteworthy mainly for the authors’ <A href="https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=199957646696501&story_fbid=1267404596618462", where they present Frontiers as an equally-prestigious imprint of Nature:
It is worth noticing that Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, is a Journal that is associated with the Nature Publishing Group, the most prestigious in the world. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience has become the #1 most-cited journal in psychology, the #1 most-cited open access journal dedicated to neuroscience and the 10th most-cited journal in all of neuroscience. It is also the 2nd and 3rd largest journal in all of psychology and neuroscience, respectively.
Forgive me while I pimp my own response to the paper.
↧
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by herr doktor bimler
Mirjam Curno features among the “topic(s) of this posting”.
↧
Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
When a journal is on my list, that means I recommend you NOT submit any papers to it.
Can you send a link for the second journal? There are several that have the same title, and I need to know which one you are talking about.
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
MECS Press is not on my list at this time. However, even though it’s not on my list, I would advise my friends and colleagues to find a better venue for their work than this publisher.
The Journal of Information Technology & Computer Science (IJITCS) is on my standalone journal list, and I recommend against submitting papers to it at this time.
↧
Comment on Another Controversial Paper from Frontiers by stevelaudig
Some may consider this a side issue, so be it, but “Frontiers” doesn’t exist except as a legal shadow of individuals. The individuals should be named. The corporation [if it is such a thing] must, in order to be credible, fully disclose all ownership interests. If this “thing” doesn’t fully disclose “who it is” it has zero credibility. It’s only fair that one knows “who” one is talking to. cheers.
↧
Comment on One Problem with the Scholarly Publishing Industry by Laura
Why do you so quickly assume that a recent PhD graduate CAN’T be an expert in publishing ethics? If she works for a major publisher, having knowledge in ethics is part of her job. She’s also following the orders of her supervisor(s).
Moreover, talent and motivation are not enough to get a job these days, as we all know. Why Dr. Granqvist left the lab is nobody’s concern but hers. There are hundreds of possible reasons, most of which have nothing to do with her skills. You clearly never considered that some people find working outside a lab more rewarding — this does not make them lesser human beings unworthy of professional respect.
That last point is what makes this whole thread of comments and the original post so troubling. They all insinuate (some less subtly than others) that lab scientists are a higher class of people, while those PhDs who choose to work elsewhere are failures.
↧
Comment on One Problem with the Scholarly Publishing Industry by wkdawson
I don’t sense that Beall had any ill intention behind the initial thread. The problem is that academia has changed drastically over the last 30 years.
If you had started out some 30/40 years ago, ending up unemployed or taking some grunt job probably did tend to suggest some “issues” with the individual. Now it is more likely to be yet another indication that the system has failed. Many of these problems have probably always been there, but they have escalated to deafening tenor.
Beall hedged his point. Though he ventured onto a land mine, I appreciate that he is beginning to recognize that this is a much bigger issue than the mere the skulduggery of a few flimflam predatory OA operators. The “weeds” growing in Academic publishing have roots that go deep into the ground: similar to the Japanese knotweed ( http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/japanese-knotweed-everything-you-ever-4328310 — what you see in the video is no really joke!). I cannot imagine that someone would actually bring something like that from Asia. I didn’t know it actually had any natural enemies even _in_ Japan. Going after the predatory journals is like pulling from the topsoil.
↧
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Cam
Can you please provide a typical example of ‘augmented income’ for a life science journal?
Thanks
↧
Comment on One Problem with the Scholarly Publishing Industry by Harvey Kane
First, I would suggest you no longer deal with Springer.
Second there is nothing wrong with making a profit. If there were you would not be paid!
Third, fight your way up the Springer chain of command. Look at their corporate page and go to the top and state your complaint.
Forth, stop tilting at windmills. The woe is me routine seems to be getting you nowhere.
Fifth, write a note to each editorial board member and see if one of them can help.
Lastly, pointing out errors may be self satisfying but understand that very few people if any purposefully make errors. But, understand errors occur.
I suggest you read the warranties and indemnity clause included in all publishing contracts. You may find your claims of malfeasance misdirected.
↧
Comment on Lambert Academic Publishing: A Must to Avoid by Ronak
yes its true that Siddhārtha Gautama was born in nepal but he get knowledge of live and let live theory form Jainism, so virtually he become Buddha in India, of course its reality that he bone in nepal but its also true he become budda in India likewise Hitler bone in Austria but he was ruler of Germany….accept the true that nepal king get wisdom in India, so indian say that buddha is born in India not Siddhārtha Gautama
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by sathy
Dear Dr Beall,
I really don’t know about the activities of predatory journals. One of my articles has been already published from this journal. In this case, how can I withdraw from that journal? Or how it effect in my career in educational sectors?
Thanks.
↧
↧
Comment on One Problem with the Scholarly Publishing Industry by Robert Cameron
I’m with wkdawson here. But I think that this discussion has taken an unhealthy turn, perhaps because it has tended to home in on individual cases that may or may not have merit (how can we possibly tell?). We can, and Jeffrey does, expose bogus publishers and journals, and look at systemic failings. I think that individual cases, especially when assessing individual, personal, motivations are dodgy. There should be other ways of dealing with bad behaviour at the individual level than using a general, hedged worry raised by Jeffrey here. But I realise that it is often hard to get a hearing for your perceived grievance.
↧
Comment on Another Respected Society Journal Victimized by Title Thief by quiquelps
I agree with John Mitchel on universities not being obliged to pay “author-suggested OA payments to bottom-of-the-barrel operators”. While I have used OA journals to publish, I have always attached Jeffrey’s list to my request for “costos editoriales”, trying to make the list a standard reference in my institution.
So, OA must not be predatory or counterfeits and all that. JB’s list saved me of publishing with Bentham. I don’t want a bad karma!
↧
Comment on Another Respected Society Journal Victimized by Title Thief by tudoreynon
Thanks for your work by the way, I know you get taken for granted a lot, but it has been really useful to me recently. Thanks
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
