Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel

Embed this content in your HTML


Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Channel Catalog

Channel Description:

Critical analysis of scholarly open-access publishing

older | 1 | .... | 508 | 509 | (Page 510) | 511 | 512 | .... | 541 | newer

    0 0

    Emerging Sources isn’t actually “easy to get into”.

    Our 20% of our new journals have been accepted in Emerging Sources. Whereas 80% of our total content is in the full ISI.

    As someone who applies to Thomson Reuters regularly, I was actually surprised how tough the criteria was for emerging sources content.

    You’re just making assumptions based on a very simplistic/binary view of the industry.

    The journals you label “predatory” are probably in there because they have the potential to be high-impact, or Thomson Reuters see other potential in them.

    That is, of course the entire point of Emerging Sources – to find journals with high potential, not the finished product

    0 0

    You are looking at it in a very simplistic/binary way

    As someone working for a publisher, with a very in-depth knowledge of how the Thomson Reuters indexes work I find the theory that emerging sources is “easy to get into” a bit odd.

    It’s just as selective as the main index, albeit the criteria is different.

    Remember, the aim of emerging sources is to find journals with high-potential, not finished products. Journals that are high quality, from day 1, go straight into the main index.

    0 0

    I think you’r making assumptions, based on translation issues.

    The 40% plagiarism rate, is usually the trigger for journals to reject and ban authors – I genuinely think they mean that.

    Developing nations often don’t have the greatest websites. I don’t think you can make sweeping statements about the journal just because of that

    0 0

    Given that there must be some legitimate business in this city, one should be careful to not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

    Perhaps we need a list of warning signs.

    Jeffrey Beall posted: ” Hyderabad, India is one of the most corrupt cities on earth, I think. It is home to countless predatory open-access publishers and conference organizers, and new, open-access publishing companies and brands are being created there every day. All insti”

    0 0

    Fraud in confirmed. It is true that India has the highest publication fraudsters. An example is ijirr( International journal of information research and review ). This organisation accepted my paper and acknowledge receipt for payment and ever since they failed to communicate me again. All my messages were not headed. Kindly assist me to retrieve my $60 I paid to them. Thanks On Nov 22, 2016 5:01 PM, “Scholarly Open Access” wrote:

    > Jeffrey Beall posted: ” Hyderabad, India is one of the most corrupt cities > on earth, I think. It is home to countless predatory open-access publishers > and conference organizers, and new, open-access publishing companies and > brands are being created there every day. All insti” >

    0 0

    Thank you Jeffrey. I´m a researcher from a low-income country and we are always pushed to publish or perish but with less resources to identify what is behind the facade. Therefore, having some experts devoted to analyse and disseminate these findings among the episttemic community is really helpful. Thanks! (Argentina)

    0 0

    Jeffrey, thank you for continuing to to be a scholarly open access watchdog, of sorts. I received unsolicited messages on LinkedIn from OMICS months ago. Frankly, initially I felt honored to be asked to submit an abstract to be published. The thought of being published was right in line with my goals and objectives, especially after having recently been exposed to the ugliness of ageism and job saturation in my profession (pharmacist) of over 30 years. I happily accepted the task and amazed even myself with a review of iantophoretic migraine headache patch delivery system, ZECUITY. A cursory google search, however, on OMICS revealed several disreputable comments about OMICS. I reported my findings to LinkedIn, asking for a response; however, as of today-almost 6 months later, I have heard nothing back from LinkedIn. On the other hand, I have heard from OMICS repeatedly. Their (OMICS) promises have ranged from making me moderator of a seminar where I would also present my research to requesting $1000 to register at the hotel for 3 days during the seminar (cost of flight not included.) A short time later, I shared with OMICS that I had joined Scholarly Open Access and also requested an invoice detailing each line item’s cost. Needless to say, I have not heard back from OMICS and would advise anyone to steer completely clear of this organization. While OMICS gives Open Access a bad name, I am sure that there are reputable open access sites out there-we just need to find them.

    0 0

    I have sold my name Pulsus and some journals to OMICS. If there were no need for this kind o publisher they would not exist. When I used to publish them I received zero support from the Societies (in fact, we paid THEM), no government support, authors didn’t want to pay, subscribers were scarce and our only source of revenue was pharmaceutical advertising. The model is broken.

    0 0

    Please correct
    The map of Hindustan.

    0 0

    Dear Mrs Beall,

    May you check the Scientia ricerca
    Chronicles of Pharmaceutical Science Journal
    If its have real impact factor ?
    and is this real publisher journal or fake

    Best regards

    0 0

    Kunal Joe, <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/11/17/predatory-publishers-thriving-on-linkedin/#comment-427499">commenting in a more recent thread</a>, notes that Mr Anil Mehra has opened a new website targeting other predatory journals (promising impact factors and index entries, as well as an e-mail spamming service). His new website depends so heavily on laziness, incompetence and stolen content that it claims to be the on-line version of the <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20161123191130/http://jhb.joaia.co.in/" rel="nofollow">Puget Sound Business Journal</a>.

    0 0

    You’re the second person to say this – which elements of the map need correcting? Is it something to do with the areas disputed between India/Pakistan and India/China?

    0 0

    Jeffrey criticizes OMICS for their questionable practices (fake editorial board members, hidden fees, lack of proper peer review for journals advertised as peer-reviewed). A company that engages in such practices acquiring more journals is cause for concern because their practices will spread more widely and reduce the quality of scientific communication and publication worldwide. If a company does not engage in widespread malpractice, then their acquiring more journals is not an issue unless they are in danger of becoming a monopoly.

    0 0

    This publisher is included on my list, and I recommend you about it completely.

    0 0

    I have been trying to reply but it has not worked. I had published peer review journals for 32 years. When I, at almost 70, decided to retire, there was not one company that wanted to buy me, except for OMICS. Authors do not want to pay the fees, subscriptions are nil, everybody wants open access and the pharmaceutical advertising is way down. I wish them well.

    0 0

    You are correct Keith. I sold it to them. However, the letter from Asima above is so purely written that only OMICS might publish her work. Good luck!

    0 0

    I got some information about you are supported by big publishers, its it true?

    0 0

    You have to admire the Hyderabad technoscamming digital industry companies for persuading the Andhra Pradesh regional government to provide them (through APIIC) with infrastructure and accommodation that they would otherwise have to pay for themselves.

    The State possibly thought they would attract the next Microsoft or Google (though given the disinclination among tech corporations about paying taxes, the benefit of doing so is not obvious). Instead they attracted call centres, OMICS, Allied Academies, Insight, iMedPub, Jacobs, JSciMed, Peertechz, MedCrave, and Bio Accent (who named their company like a laundry-powder additive)

    0 0

    I also came to know that the editorial people in board and the company are youngsters with no experiences. You can see the reviews from employees in Glassdoor website (www.glassdoor.com)

    0 0


    I have few doubts

    You are saying Hyderabad, India — City of Corruption. Then what about USA.

    1. All these predatory publishers registered their companies in USA. Why USA is encouraging bogus companies.

    2. All these predatory publishers opened bank accounts in USA. Article processing charges were deposited in that accounts. USA is earning foreign currency. All these publishers are paying TAX to USA. Why should always USA prefer money over ethics.

    3. Why Library of congress (ISSN Center USA) is assigning ISSN’s for these publishers.

    Bottom line :If Hyderabad, India — City of Corruption then USA – ?

older | 1 | .... | 508 | 509 | (Page 510) | 511 | 512 | .... | 541 | newer