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

Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by 5 Steps to Separate Science from Hype, No PhD Required | The Incubator

0
0

[...] list of “predatory” journals is a good guide to what not to trust. These journals will publish any research for a hefty price. [...]


Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by “Predatory” Open-Access Scientific Journals Threaten Academic Reputations

0
0

[...] at the University of Colorado in Denver, became so concerned with the trend that he developed Scholarly Open Access, a blacklist of open-access publishers he believes may be engaging in pseudo-academia. He said [...]

Comment on Research by Jeffrey Beall

0
0
It is included on the "independent journals" list because it does not publish under the banner of a publisher. That list is here: <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/</a>

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Can you tell me five publishers or journals that you think should not be on the lists?

There are hundreds of new journals that are not included on my lists.

Can you send me examples of journals on my lists that match the conditions you state in the last paragraph of your comments?

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Avraham

0
0

So interesting is the fact that Hindawi has a big add on some Nature issues, is it not?

Comment on The Suspicious Case of Science Record Journals by Kathy Dernoga

0
0

I noticed that the publisher is listed as AIP.http://www.sciencerecord.com/
Not American Institute of Physics but Academic Information Press. A quick google search did not yield any results. Who is the publisher?

Comment on The Suspicious Case of Science Record Journals by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

I think it’s just a made-up name meant to make Science Record look less bogus.

Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by Your weekend reading: Simple secure passwords, an invisible brain | Krantenkoppen Tech

0
0

[...] legitimate on the interwebs, as we learn from Markham Nolan’s talk on false Internet stories. Here’s a useful guide to some predatory open-access [...]


Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by Pseudo-Academia | Brian Sandberg: Historical Perspectives

0
0

[...] Jeffrey Beall maintains a blacklist of “predatory open-access journals.” According to the New York Times, “There were [...]

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Peter Matthews

0
0

True spam has no relevance at all to most receivers. Marketing is more-or-less targeted according to the benefit/risk of reaching a broad target and offending receivers within the target group. Marketing costs must rise if the aim is to reach many people with strict test for relevancy.

Maybe Hindawi is pushing the envelope of acceptability with its marketing, but I suspect that the company that wants to survive, so they will respond to negative feedback if they have ways to receive (or perceive) and process such feedback.

Meanwhile, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, publisher of Science, continues to send out physical envelopes with nicely printed form letters inviting me to pay a subscription to join their Society and recieve the journal. I admire the website and journal, but do not need a personal subscription because my institutiuon purchases the printed journal. I am amazed that they can afford such marketing, but since many individuals and libraries subscribe, I guess it is cost effective.

I don’t regard advances of the AAAS as spam, and not even as junk mail. It is legitimate marketing that I choose to ignore.

Comment on The Suspicious Case of Science Record Journals by John

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by dzrlib

0
0

Isn’t the difference between Science magazine’s ‘spam’ and that of Hindawi … that Science isn’t trolling for articles. Isn’t one of the measures of a quality journal the rejection rate?

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Nils

0
0

From http://www.networketiquette.net/core_rules_do_not_spam.html :

“It is proper netiquette to refrain from sending unsolicited messages through the internet or responding to them. Unsolicited sales messages are spam. Spam email messages are illegal in the United States.”

and

“Proper internet etiquette prevents sending unsolicited messages of any kind. It is not appropriate to waste a users time with unwanted information.”

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Johannes Wilm

0
0

Interesting! How do they get the information into the XML files though? Most journals I’ve come across start out with Microsoft Word as input files, and then somehow need to move that into a format you can use for typesetting. That process usually requires a lot of manual human intervention.
That was the reason why we started Fidus Writer ( http://www.fiduswriter.com ), so that the auhtor can either directly write in this online editor, or he can do the import himself through copy-and-paste. Output of fidus writer can then be Latex, which you can use directly in the journal. I haven’t found other editors that do that, at least none with a WYSIWYG interface.
How do you guys do that?

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Alex H

0
0

A small OA journal may receive dozens of plagiarized/substandard articles, subject to desk rejection, This may also produce a modest (10-25%) acceptance rate.


Comment on A M Publishers Arrives at the Scholarly Open-Access Boomtown by R.A.D.Piyadasa

0
0

My papers published in Canadian journal on computing in mathematics, Natural sciences, Engineering and mathematics (CNMSEM)have been read by many.Apart from the trivial typing mistakes I myself have made in submitting the final version contents are O.K..Any one can challenge against the validity of the proofs given in the papers.
I sent some paper contents directly to the reviewers I nominated for CMNSEM and check.
Dear prof. Beal,
You are doing a nice job. But some rascals have already misused your effort against me at least..

Comment on Report Details Predatory Practices of Two Bosnian Journals by Prof.dr Mensura Kudumovic

0
0

I am shocked.
GENOCIDE ……
happened in my country and we are still battling with some kind of a “cold war”.
We are constantly suffering by constant attacks from the region on our values: economic, cultural, educational, scientific etc. and this impacting our success in the field of scientific publishing.
While Bosnia and Herzegovina has only 3 journals covered by SCIE, the countries from the region like Serbia, has significantly more. The question is HOW is that possible? My country is not united yet, it is still destroyed, wounded and fragmented. United States and Europe are helping us to integrate country, develop institutions and heal. Many countries and organizations are helping us to recover and develop education, science because our country has no budget for scientific infrastructure.
Some organizations and individuals from abroad helped us to establish scientific infrastructure and journals. We need knowledge, democracy, justice, multi-culture and support.
Every day we are investing efforts to improve quality of our journal. This way we are directly encouraging and helping development of scientific research studies, especially for the young people from the region. We are also indirectly helping and impacting usage of databases of scientific journals, as well as journals and studies that have been cited, which is constantly increasing Impact factor.
I need to mention that as a minority as only one/first WOMAN/BOSNAK/EDITOR in the World, I have been discriminated on many occasions.

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Peter Matthews

0
0

99% of good research cannot be published in Science or Nature, as the role of those journals is really to popularise the best research going. In itself, rejection rate is not a good measure of the value of a journal. The ability of editors and reviewers to recognise good research, and to help authors raise the level of their presentation, and get published, is part of what makes a good service journal. This community service role is also lacking in a great many new start-up journals!

Comment on Report Details Predatory Practices of Two Bosnian Journals by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Four publications? Sounds like it’s pretty easy to publish there.

Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by ACRLog » Evaluating Information: The Light Side of Open Access

0
0

[...] with and photo of University of Colorado Denver librarian Jeffrey Beall, compiler of the useful Beall’s List guide to potentially predatory open access scholarly journals and [...]

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images