Comment on Questionable Subscription Publisher Acts Like a Predatory OA One by Dr Leigh Wilson

May 12, 2016, 4:51 pm

≫ Next: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

≪ Previous: Comment on Another Predatory Conference Organizer from Asia: Academic Fora by M. LaRocco

$

0

0

I just received this one, Different Journal, different name but I suspect the same crowd??

I hope this email finds you well. I came across your paper on Climate adversity and resilience: the voice of rural Australia. and was hoping to have the opportunity to discuss having a short followup to this paper or perhaps a review article published in one of the next issues of the Internal Medicine Review. It would be nice to see a paper with information on any continued research or new data since this was published. I would also be interested in knowing more about your current projects; perhaps there is the potential for an article that would interest our readers. We are a peer-reviewed monthly journal, published both in print and online. The submission deadline is flexible. I am happy to asnwer any of your questions. Please get back to me at your earliest convenience.

Best Regards,

Milena Mihaleva
Senior Editor
Internal Medicine Review
712 H Street #1018
Washington DC 20002 USA
Internalmedicinereview.org

---

Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

May 12, 2016, 10:03 pm

≫ Next: Comment on The Increasing Use of Predatory Journals for “Advocacy Research” by Academics need to embrace new ways of writing and sharing research |

≪ Previous: Comment on Questionable Subscription Publisher Acts Like a Predatory OA One by Dr Leigh Wilson

$

0

0

Marco: agreed. I had added that to another post below.

I am actually strongly in favor of peer review, and make that point below very clear. However, it is also clear from the article that Einstein, even with the peer review, was given very special treatment.

Imagine Einstein (the nobody) where the editor sends his paper to an enemy who slanders him (e.g., maybe at that time Mac, who denied and possibly destroyed people for atomistic thinking) or to some blockhead who demands 15 million billion zillion “benchmarks” (all unspecified and deniable by fiat by the reviewer) or other such nonsense (lack of) thinking… Einstein might have been blotted out from history. I have personally witness this evil in my life too.

Nevertheless, in general, I would say that I have benefitted significantly from the advice of reviewers.

Comment on The Increasing Use of Predatory Journals for “Advocacy Research” by Academics need to embrace new ways of writing and sharing research |

May 12, 2016, 10:35 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by wkdawson

≪ Previous: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

$

0

0

[…] primary stores of human knowledge, and their peer review process foregrounds credible research – most of the time. They teach academics how to write carefully argued pieces, and the best ones hold us to high […]

Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by wkdawson

May 12, 2016, 10:38 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by Temer, Kassab e o Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações | Direto da Ciência

≪ Previous: Comment on The Increasing Use of Predatory Journals for “Advocacy Research” by Academics need to embrace new ways of writing and sharing research |

$

0

0

I have mixed feeling about Sci-Hub.

Although some people _could_ use this for nefarious schemes, most likely, the majority of users are basically pragmatic. I have lived abroad for quite some time: 20 years in Japan, and now two years in Poland. The current situation is really quite impossible for a scholar in many countries. The standard salary of a Polish scientist is less than $1000 per month. I think it’s something similar in China. Undoubtedly, that is most likely also so in India. In Africa, some academics have to work a second job (e.g., taxi driver) to survive. They are probably far too busy at the grind to come up with a scheme to plagiarize using Sci-Hub.

Even if the salaries were far better, it makes no sense to pay $40 or $50 for a manuscript unseen and unevaluated. Many are major disappointments and next to useless; another product of this irresponsible publish or perish metric environment we’ve created.

I have opted to work through libraries and communicating with the authors for preprints. This has not been particularly easy.

All this said; I realize that there is the other side of this. There are people who trained in formative times in the publishing trade and make their living as copy editors, layout, production, etc. These people have devoted their lives to this trade, and free downloads will basically snuff this out. Elsevier definitely has been a much better publisher when it came to producing and correcting proofs.

At any rate, the real story is not this stark picture of the fat-cats pocketing _all_ the money vs scholars going hungry.

Many reader pays journals have started to offer open access. Someone, somewhere, should have to pay something to keep the trade going I think. Perhaps grant funding agencies, governments and universities will have to help promote open access to overcome this problem. Either that, or some sort of iTunes system should be introduced (as mentioned above). At any rate, a more amenable business model really is seriously needed.

Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by Temer, Kassab e o Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações | Direto da Ciência

May 13, 2016, 4:15 am

≫ Next: Comment on Appeals by Pan

≪ Previous: Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by wkdawson

$

0

0

[…] Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism Jeffrey Beall […]

Comment on Appeals by Pan

May 13, 2016, 10:38 am

≫ Next: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by nuray

≪ Previous: Comment on Sci-Hub Will Increase Academic Plagiarism by Temer, Kassab e o Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações | Direto da Ciência

$

0

0

Strongly agree! Ipn keeps on sending all kinds of call for conferences and says that their conferences have special issue in SCI or scopus journals. They are very aggressive in terms of spamming using Email and social media, e.g. Facebook.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by nuray

May 13, 2016, 2:48 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Frew Amsale

≪ Previous: Comment on Appeals by Pan

$

0

0

Hi Jeffrey
I think the International Journal of Advanced Technology and Innovative Research (IJATIR) may be considered to be listed here. A sample article which is a completely carbon copy of an article in one of the IEEE’s journals is on the link below:

http://www.ijatir.org/uploads/126453IJATIR1628-92.pdf

The original article is:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6409463

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Frew Amsale

May 13, 2016, 2:54 pm

≫ Next: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Tryanti

≪ Previous: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by nuray

$

0

0

Dear Dr. Beall, what can you say about the European Scientific Journal in 2016?

---

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Tryanti

May 14, 2016, 2:39 am

≫ Next: Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

≪ Previous: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Frew Amsale

$

0

0

Dear sir, what about this journal?
http://recentscientific.com/submit-your-article

Thanks in advance.

Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

May 14, 2016, 2:56 am

≫ Next: Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

≪ Previous: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Tryanti

$

0

0

most of RIP journals is removed from the SCOPUS list 2016

Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

May 14, 2016, 3:30 am

≫ Next: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

≪ Previous: Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

$

0

0

Check this publisher Pushpa Publishing House from india…charging for pubilshing as well as subscription http://www.pphmj.com/journals/fjms_author_information.htm

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

May 14, 2016, 4:11 am

≫ Next: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

≪ Previous: Comment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires Copyright Transfer by Sanjay

$

0

0

The <em>International Journal of Recent Scientific Research</em> is included on my list <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank">here</a>.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

May 14, 2016, 4:13 am

≫ Next: Comment on Large, New OA Publishers Continue to Appear — Two Recent Examples by Ali

≪ Previous: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

$

0

0

The same thing I said in 2015 and earlier. It is a very weak journal, not a good place for serious researchers to publish their work.

Comment on Large, New OA Publishers Continue to Appear — Two Recent Examples by Ali

May 14, 2016, 9:00 am

≫ Next: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

≪ Previous: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$

0

0

Juniper publishers send many fake linkedin invitations with many fake names

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

May 14, 2016, 1:00 pm

≫ Next: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by herr doktor bimler

≪ Previous: Comment on Large, New OA Publishers Continue to Appear — Two Recent Examples by Ali

$

0

0

Thank you for sharing this information. The offending journal is now on my list. Much appreciated.

---

Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by herr doktor bimler

May 14, 2016, 5:38 pm

≫ Next: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

≪ Previous: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

$

0

0

A commenter at Respectful Insolence wondered how the OMICS trash manage to recruit Nobel laureates to lend their reputations for turd-burnishing services, as keynote speakers for http://www.conferenceseries.com:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/05/12/whats-in-a-word-integrative-versus-alternative-medicine-again/#comment-437193

He was specifically thinking of Ada Yonuth. Further inquiry reveals that Yonuth (and several other Nobel laureates) are regular attractions at other predatory conferences, specifically the annual “Drug Discovery and Therapy World Congress”:
http://www.ddtwc.com/abstracts.php

DD&TW, you will recall, is the conference-scam branch of Bentham’s skeezy operation. It is an odd Janus-faced identity, also advertised as the Global Biotechnology Congress (with the same venue, same dates, same speakers), to double the number of suckers.
http://www.globalbiotechcongress.com/index.php

Anyway, I am forced to the melancholy conclusion that Nobel laureates are just as venal (or just as bad at recognising a grift) as the rest of us.

Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

May 14, 2016, 9:55 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Other pages by lidafaz@yahoo.com

≪ Previous: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by herr doktor bimler

$

0

0

Well, it does seem a bit difficult to assess in this example, but I would put the benefit of a doubt on “just as bad at recognising a grift”.

I’ve been around long enough and in enough places, including the US, to smell this before. One of those my antennae picked up on along the way had to do with these “conferences”. When you are not getting enough publications, what do you do? … You set up a conference. …

In this respect, OMICS is the symptoms. They provide a service. They have a database, so they can send out announcements and (presumably) take care of some of the nitty-gritty details (directions on how to get to the place, maps, refreshments, and all the multitude of things you have to pay attention to). Things could not be any easier – I suppose. So now, even add two or three other keywords together so you can get more participants. This is what business and networks do for you. Used honorably, I could even be good.

The problem, of course, comes when the ideas are basically pseudoscience or (at least) very questionable. This is why false measuring scales (metrics) are so dangerous. The “publish or perish” and “conferences” mentality are false measures of soundness and have only encouraged this kind of grift. The only way to grasp scientific soundness is to carefully evaluate the works, and that is all. So I would say that “false measures” (long in place) are actually the cause (the virus) and OMICS (etc) are the symptoms.

Comment on Other pages by lidafaz@yahoo.com

May 14, 2016, 10:28 pm

≫ Next: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by MadisonMD

≪ Previous: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by wkdawson

$

0

0

hi,Professor
Please check the” APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL” with Irregular ISSN: 2076-3417 and the announcement on the site
http://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci/indexing
It seems like this site is a fake.
pleas help me.
Thank you for your attention

Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by MadisonMD

May 15, 2016, 9:34 am

≫ Next: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Yusuf Arief Afandy

≪ Previous: Comment on Other pages by lidafaz@yahoo.com

$

0

0

Dear Angela,
As an independent observer reading this thread, your replies and paper are troublesome for the following reasons:
1. You stated “[my website] opened its doors in January 2016, way after the articles were submitted, and so I NOW earn money” whereas you now acknowledge that, in fact the website was registered and open much earlier and not way after the article was submitted.
2. Your rationale for not declaring COI–that you don’t charge very much and have not yet turned a profit–rings hollow.
3. Your article appears to indicate 100% effectiveness of your intervention: “In the present study, all participants who made these dietary changes were able to eliminate migraine medications and remained migraine free.” suggesting a very strong ascertain mentioned bias.

How long was your article under review prior to acceptance?

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Yusuf Arief Afandy

May 16, 2016, 1:01 am

≫ Next: Comment on Green OA is Better than Publishing in a Predatory Journal by Yusuf Arief Afandy

≪ Previous: Comment on New Name, Same Horrible Business: OMICS International by MadisonMD

$

0

0

beal, please confirm if taylor and francis are predatory or not? i can not see this name in your list. tq