Is the Journal “International Journal of Science and Research” a predatory journal.
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Rini Raveendran
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Rini Raveendran
MedknowPublications and JournalOn Web authentic ?
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by Mike Undersson
Mr. Beall,
Anyone who reads, thinks, analyzes, compares…etc., is a scientist in someway for what he reads about.
Do you think that scientists are only those who work with mice, butterflies or apes in a lab or a zoo? You are wrong.
Science is open to all. It is not limited to those who handle rats or insects in their hands.
Peer-review is NOT a gauge of quality even if it takes years, and the ‘quality’ you are talking about is very subjective and variable.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by TeeVee Thammasat Rodngam
Dear Jeffrey Beall,
Could you please help me check if this organization is trustable and is not in the beall’s list sir? I am seeking for the proper one to publish me ph.d. thesis? If yes, could you please suggest me which one I should submit my paper for graduation. Thank you so much.
1. http://educationconference.co/2016/
2. http://www.asianstudy.info/
3. http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied&page=index
email: tv_junior9@hotmail.com
↧
Comment on Appeals by Martin
This journal is well known to publish pretty much anything. They do not do a peer review (they usually ask authors to provide their own referee reports, or sometimes the editor herself briefly reads the papers) and also publish a lot of papers presented at their dubious conferences. It is a nice business model, but I recommend do not publish with them.
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall
All three are low quality. None of them is a good place to publish a Ph.D. thesis.
Can your adviser help you find a high-quality journal to publish your paper in?
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall
Yes, it's included on my list <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here</a>, and I recommend you avoid it and instead find a stronger journal for your work. Good luck.
↧
Comment on Another Article about Plagiarism — That Contains Plagiarism by OffHours
I disagree with Arnaw and the plagiarism article that Indian or Russian “young researchers” or simply “researchers” should be excused for plagiarism because they are from “developing and underdeveloped world”. Do Indians and Russians really claim that they are “underdeveloped” in terms of their academic training and intellectual capital?.. If researchers of any age of any country struggle to comprehend what plagiarism is, they ought to ascribe it to their own limited intelligence as well as to the low standards of research integrity in their academia, not to the level of income inequality in their home country.
As a student from a developing country, I find this “young researchers from developing countries” begging excuse immature, manipulative and miserable when it comes to research integrity. For instance, there’s a widespread public opinion among Russian speakers that the West has an inferior human capital due to its inferior general education in natural sciences, the hurdles of political correctness, politics of inclusion and empowerment. So, what is the reason behind this beggar’s excuse when we don’t really think so? I can think of nothing but a deliberate shortcut to publication trying to play on Western affluenza. Predatory publishers, the tender age of researchers, their corrupted academic supervisors, their country’s income inequality, is this a soap opera?..
↧
Comment on Is the Editor of the Springer Journal Scientometrics indifferent to plagiarism? by Ben
I agree with those who feel that the Editor’s reply was not condescending. However, lifting whole paragraphs w/o quotes and then citing them is beyond my own comfort level when publishing. I think a letter should be sent to the authors and they should respond to it in the journal. I would not make them retract the paper, just make sure everyone knows the concern and they respond openly in the journal. Best part about that solution is that they will have to use their OWN words in responding!
↧
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by Klaas van Dijk
John Mashey wrote on February 18, 2016 at 12:21 PM “Ollila of course is entitled to express his opinion, and claim his papers are peer-reviewed: perhaps he has no clue regarding real peer review. If he wants to be taken seriously, he can propose a talk for EGU or submit papers to credible journals. I wouldn’t hold this against Aalto in general, but I hope they understand this is not a plus, since that affiliation is on the papers. (Yes, I support academic freedom, and I understand the issue with emeritus profs (who sometimes forget to mention that.) Still, university affiliations are supposed to reflect credibility.)”
.
Within The Netherlands, both the university and the author have a shared responsibility when it comes to the credibility of the scientific output, in a very wide sense, when the author has used the university as his affiliation. A very clear example of this policy is “Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel”, the final report of the Levelt Committee ( https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/3ff904d7-547b-40ae-85fe-bea38e05a34a_Final%20report%20Flawed%20Science.pdf ). Stapel was not anymore affilated to UvA (University of Amsterdam) and to RUG (University of Groningen), but both universities have fully taken their responsibility, and thus conducted their own research, within the context / framework of the
Levelt Committee, for all publications from Stapel with an UvA / RUG affilation. See the report for all details.
.
Another example from The Netherlands, once again at UvA, is the report ‘Evaluating the scientific veracity of publications by dr. Förster’ (see http://www.uva.nl/en/news-events/news/uva-news/content/news/2015/07/update-articles-jens-forster-investigated.html ). Jens Förster was at that moment not anymore employed by UvA, and already for quite a while, but that does not imply that UvA was not anymore responsible for papers with an UvA affiliation which were authored by Jens Förster.
.
Within The Netherlands, the overarching framework are the VSNU “Principles of good academic teaching and research” (“The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practice”, see http://www.rug.nl/about-us/organization/rules-and-regulations/algemeen/gedragscodes-nederlandse-universiteiten/code-wetenschapsbeoefening-14-en.pdf and http://www.rug.nl/about-us/organization/rules-and-regulations/algemeen/gedragscodes-nederlandse-universiteiten/wetenschappelijke-integriteit-12-en.pdf
Item 10 of the Pre-amble to the Code connects both documents with each other.
.
Acting according to the VSNU Code is mandatory, for anyone affilated to any of the 14 research universities in The Netherlands (see http://www.vsnu.nl/en_GB/dutch-universities.html for an overview), and this is already the case since 1 January 2005. RUG, University of Groningen, is an example of a Dutch university where a PhD candidate must promise, during the graduation ceremony, and in public, always to act fully according to “The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practice” (see http://www.rug.nl/education/phd-programme/promotieregeling/).
.
The well-respected ‘Journal of Sea Research’ ( http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-sea-research/ ) is an example of a journal which states at https://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-sea-research/1385-1101/guide-for-authors#8100 :
“Submission declaration and verification. Submission of an article implies (..) that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out (..)”.
.
I tend to think that this guideline implies that all affilations of all authors (so for example also Aalto University) must have approved that the manuscript in question can be submitted to the Journal of Sea Research.
↧
Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
I considered it, but I shall not add this journal to the list at this time. There’s not a strong case to be made for adding it.
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by Keith Fraser
Who is claiming that only zoologists are scientists? A zoologist wouldn’t even be qualified to give a professional opinion on the article discussed here, unless they were also a climate scientist.
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by tekija
Aalto University is keeping very well hidden how docents are nominated and what is their relationship to specific departments. No information can be found through google, only news about nominations. Some departments also list their currently affiliated docents who vary widely in number. However, a general view can be obtained e.g. from the University of Helsinki Docent Association:
http://blogs.helsinki.fi/dosenttiyhdistys/docent-and-docenture-in-english/
which is typical and likely applicable in principle to Aalto as well.
We also see that docents are NOT listed as part of the Aalto academic faculty structure:
http://www.aalto.fi/en/about/careers/other_academic_positions/
In fact, a university can nominate a person to docentship who never was an alumnus and who will never work in the university, only in an outside institution.
It is also possible to get the title of docent from several different universites and hold all these parallel titles concurrently.
Of course any university should think twice before nominating anyone docent as it is attaching that person, even in those external cases, to its own name, a connection that can later be exploited:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_B%C3%A4ckman
The above are all general comments and not intended as specific to the case of Dr. Ollila.
↧
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by John Mashey
Thanks, those seem like good policies.
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by John Mashey
Thanks, useful.
Note: as i posted above, paper affiliations generally didn’t say much except affiliation with Aalto.
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by MC
Although I read and analyzed your comment, my scientific aptitude was measurably decreased as a result.
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Gabriel
Hi,
What about Hindawi, MDPI publishing, Pushpa Publishing House?
Are they good journals?
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall
I’ve analyzed it before. I found it borderline, so I didn’t add it to my list. It’s not a strong publisher, but it’s also not predatory.
↧
Comment on Finnish Man Uses Easy Open-Access Journals to Publish Junk Climate Science by Mike Undersson
No worry, you will recover it with practice and easier analyses. You need to start with analyzing easier comments before to get to complex ones.
↧
Comment on Appeals by Gaston Karovsky
Good Morning,
The Academic and Business Research Institute (aabri.com) has now been reinstated in Cabell’s Journal Listing. I verified this with Cabell’s and they are indeed legitimate. Why do they continue to be part of the predatory publishers? Here is the message from their page:
A Message from the Publisher –
February 18, 2016
In December 2014, Cabell’s launched a reevaluation initiative whereby journals appearing in the Directories were examined according to new, more stringent criteria on a rotating basis throughout the year. All AABRI journals (along with many others) were removed from the database as Cabell’s underwent this reevaluation process.
I am pleased to inform you that AABRI business and education journals were reinstated and listed in the Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities effective February 17, 2016.
While the reinstatement process has been long and sometimes frustrating, the end result is very gratifying. Cabell’s new standards are very rigorous and compliant with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) requirements. Reinstatement pursuant to these standards validates what we have known all along – that AABRI produces quality mid-level journals and conferences.
Thank you for your patience during the fourteen months it took to bring this reinstatement to fruition. Please share the news with your colleagues, deans and friends at other universities.
Dr. Russell Baker
Executive Director
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
