- RSS Channel Showcase 9028348
- RSS Channel Showcase 1289785
- RSS Channel Showcase 3059751
- RSS Channel Showcase 7406392
Articles on this Page
- 11/18/16--10:42: _Comment on Predator...
- 11/18/16--12:20: _Comment on Scam Pub...
- 11/18/16--12:55: _Comment on Chinese ...
- 11/19/16--02:23: _Comment on Bogus Jo...
- 11/19/16--13:15: _Comment on Predator...
- 11/20/16--01:13: _Comment on Spammers...
- 11/20/16--02:14: _Comment on Beall’s ...
- 11/20/16--03:17: _Comment on Spammers...
- 11/20/16--04:08: _Comment on Predator...
- 11/20/16--16:07: _Comment on OMICS Go...
- 11/20/16--21:01: _Comment on List of ...
- 11/21/16--01:39: _Comment on Beall’s ...
- 11/21/16--02:06: _Comment on Three Ne...
- 11/21/16--03:33: _Comment on List of ...
- 11/21/16--03:43: _Comment on Three Ne...
- 11/21/16--03:44: _Comment on Beall’s ...
- 11/21/16--08:26: _Comment on Three Ne...
- 11/21/16--09:31: _Comment on Publishe...
- 11/21/16--11:27: _Comment on How Does...
- 11/22/16--09:12: _Comment on Hyderaba...
- 11/18/16--10:42: Comment on Predatory Publishers Thriving on LinkedIn by DWeb
- 11/19/16--13:15: Comment on Predatory Publishers Thriving on LinkedIn by Kunal Joe
- 11/20/16--21:01: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by joseph dela cruz
- 11/21/16--03:33: Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
the herpes of the internet
[…] The Problem with Publishing 2.0 Yet this promising new world of easy online access and share-ability also cultivated a new and unsavory market for less trustworthy model known as “predatory publishing”. These publishers have questionable business models that spam scientists with emails enticing them to publish in journals that guarantee quick turn around in terms of the peer review process in exchange for a “fee” (see this). Make no mistake, these publishers are in it for the money. (And with that money, predatory publishers are starting to buy up legitimate journals). […]
I have been asked to review by Nutrients twice and the process consistently felt like a racket and left a bitter taste.
It went something like this. Some two years ago, when I accepted the assignment to review, I was given a choice of timeline for submitting my review of one week or two. The first time, several years ago, I chose to respond in two weeks and then on the very same day the review was due, I was told that they no longer need my review. This is after I spent two full days carefully reading a thirty page mind-numbing review and deciding to reject it. In response to my request for clarifications, they explained to me that they received two positive reviews and they no longer need my review regardless of its conclusions.
This year again, the same thing happened but on a shortened time scale. I made the mistake of accepting, they give me a choice of one or two weeks and I chose to get back to them in one week, I thought I was being nice and pretty speedy. Six days in the review process, still with plenty of sunshine till my self-imposed deadline, they email to say: "We have now received sufficient peer-review reports from other referees and would like to cancel our request". Again, fool me once — shame on you, fool me twice — you can't get fooled again. Essentially, I think they request a plurality of reviews, wait till they receive a few on the more positive note and then revoke, rescind requests and/or simply ignore the rest.
I tell my students it is unethical and unscientific to drop observations or data points from analyses which refute or invalidate the favoured hypothesis. It should be unethical and immoral to ignore reviews and select the favourable reviews with the goal of justifying the publication of shoddy articles and the collection of page charges. Jeffrey Beall: Please make some room for the 120 or so MDPI journals back on your list. We need better science not just more science, or soon we will drown the little truth left out there in this murky polluted sea of arguments. Lets set an example.
[…] Advanced Computer Technology recentemente ha accettato per la pubblicazione un articolo intitolato Toglimi dalla tua fottuta mailing list il cui testo non era niente più che quelle sei parole, ripetute per più di dieci pagine. Due […]
Have you noticed the following website?
They offer Thomson Reuters within 60 days, if the journal pay 45,000 INR.
SCOPUS indexing within 60 days, if the journal pay 48,000 INR.
Is it true?
Dear Beall Jeffrey
Kindly to inform me about this journal ( Indian Journal of Critical care medicine) ISSN (0972-5229) l wish to publish in it.which is indexed in Scopus.
American Journal of Gastroenterology is one of the best and most prestigious journals in the field of gastroenterology
This journal's publisher is not on my list.
Yes, very dubious!
Really? I've been two their last two conferences and they were excellent. No joke.
If a paper is published in one of these journals, can it still be re-submitted to other legitimate journals?
Can you please brief out the reasons that why the following journals are included in your list of standalone journals as some of these are also having a good impact factor of 5.008? so pls give us some reasons of including these journals in the list. The journals are -
1. African Journal of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicines (AJTCAM)
3. International Journal of Electrochemical Science
4. Journal of Environmental Biology
5. Journal of Psychology and Theology
7. Romanian Biotechnological Letters
8. Tehnički vjesnik = Technical Gazette (TV-TG)
9. The Journal of Nonlinear Science and Applications (JNSA)
Waiting for your response.
Hi Dr. Beall,
Can you comment about the "Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology" http://jcsitnet.com/. This journal is published by American Research Institute for Policy Development.
Generally, no, especially if you have transferred copyright.
The American Research Institute for Policy Development is a completely fake publisher from Bangladesh. I strongly recommend you have no association with this publisher in any way. Do not submit any papers, do not agree to serve on its editorial boards.
The impact factor is not a measure of journal quality or trustworthiness. Indeed, these journals serve as evidence of this.
I received mail from davidpublishing.com
I have this disturbing vision of meeting her romantically and then waking up next to the guy who's actually publishing the journal...
'typo' try: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMICS_Publishing_Group :
Parent company: OMICS Group Inc
Founder: Srinubabu Gedela
Country of origin: India
Headquarters location: Hyderabad
Publication types: Open access journals
Nonfiction topics: Science, technology, and medicine
Number of employees: 1500
Official website: www.omicsonline.org
Concerning broken LINK / URL to: ' HITEC City link' cf: