Articles on this Page
- 01/10/17--09:10: _Comment on Appeals ...
- 01/10/17--09:12: _Comment on Other pa...
- 01/10/17--09:16: _Comment on Appeals ...
- 01/10/17--09:20: _Comment on Other pa...
- 01/10/17--09:29: _Comment on Appeals ...
- 01/10/17--09:48: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--10:29: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--11:10: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--12:11: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--12:50: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--13:51: _Comment on Research...
- 01/10/17--16:51: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--20:42: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--21:47: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--22:05: _Comment on When “Sc...
- 01/10/17--22:55: _Comment on How Does...
- 01/11/17--03:33: _Comment on Bentham ...
- 01/11/17--00:06: _Comment on Beall’s ...
- 01/11/17--05:02: _Comment on Appeals ...
- 01/11/17--06:00: _Comment on Beall’s ...
- 01/10/17--09:10: Comment on Appeals by Ahmed Majeed
- 01/10/17--09:12: Comment on Other pages by Jeffrey Beall
- 01/10/17--09:16: Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
- 01/10/17--09:20: Comment on Other pages by Edward
- 01/10/17--09:29: Comment on Appeals by Ahmed Majeed
- 01/10/17--09:48: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Hemananda BP
- 01/10/17--10:29: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by From Morocco
- 01/10/17--11:10: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by CN
- 01/10/17--12:11: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Taisir
- 01/10/17--12:50: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Jeffrey Beall
- 01/10/17--16:51: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Herr Doktor Bimler
- 01/10/17--20:42: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Krishnamurthy Bhat
- 01/10/17--21:47: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Adem Mohammed Seid
- 01/10/17--22:05: Comment on When “Science and Education” Go Bad by Taisir Hasan
- 01/11/17--03:33: Comment on Bentham Open: Evidence of Article Brokers? by JohnF
- 01/11/17--00:06: Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2017 by Eyob
- 01/11/17--05:02: Comment on Appeals by Estela
Can you please inform us why you included
Diyala Journal For Pure Science
The journal is official journal for Diyala University which is governmental university and it is for not for profit establishment and none of predatory criteria fit to it.
I cannot; I have not analyzed this journal. It is not on my list. Being indexed in PubMed is completely meaningless, as PubMed is full of junk science published by predatory journals.
I think the real question that needs to be answered is, Why is Diyala University publishing such a low-quality journal and advertising fake impact factors?
Thank you. Let us know if it would be added in your list.
I agree, they should remove these impact factors
but other than that, it is not predatory
I tried to search the ISSN numbers on road.issn.org. I could not find those numbers. I hope even those are not authentic.
The former URL of this publisher was http://pubs.sciepub.com/
Now it’s not working anymore [Server Error in ‘/’ Application.]
– An example of a nonsensical paper published in American Journal of Educational Research :
Gurur-Brahmaa Gurur-Vissnnur-Gururdevo Maheshvarah I, Gurureva Param Brahma Tasmai Shrii-Gurave Namah II
(American Journal of Educational Research, 2014 2 (12A), pp 0-0.
Received September 11, 2014; Revised November 20, 2014; Accepted December 10, 2014)
When you click on (Science and Education Publishing) they directed you to this URL http://www.sciepub.com/
Their plenary speakers are the top folks in the field. Does this look legit, or did they just willy-nilly post the big names?
The good news is that only 1 journal out of the 116 is listed in Web of Science (JOURNAL OF FOOD AND NUTRITION RESEARCH)
FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Rank in Category 48 of 125
Quartile in Category Q2
No, no, this is the duplicate title this publisher created. The original journal with this title is in WoS; this publisher has nothing in the database.
If it is true that these conferences are fake, what about the event facilities holding them? for example we are supposed to be hosting one next week but know we have major concerns after realizing there were a few things not sounding right. After investigating sure enough we found pages like this exposing them. What should we do?
<i>Earlier guesses have included Nigeria, Romania, and China. </i>
They seem to be setting up a branch or extension site, "natcfp.com", although currently the links simply <a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HsfxAwn6c9kJ:www.natcfp.com/journal/FAAC%3Fid%3DFAAC%26v%3D3+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=nz&client=firefox-b" rel="nofollow">mirror the Sciepub counterpart</a>. Anyway, that site is hosted on a server in Hong Kong, which inclines me towards China as the scammers' location.
There is also the factor that someone has used the e-addresses "Giovannicascante@gmail.com" and "<a href="https://whoisology.com/email/stevencoughlins%40gmail.com/1" rel="nofollow">Stevencoughlins@gmail.com</a>", and the address "Shenzhen, China" to register a raft of similarly themed domains -- "scholarlib.net", "sciexplore.net', "acacfp.com", "scicfp.com", "sapubcfp.com", "sciepcfp.com", "sciepublising.com", "academiccfp.com", "cfsubmission.com", "cfppapers.com", "academicsubmission.com", and so on at great length. And the spam for Sciepub tends to come <i>from these domains</i>.
http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/2/12A/0/ is an absolute nonsense. It is written in typical Indian English. Talks about some special issue, which has only Indian authors. Finally the article ends with a thanks to “Freddie W. Litton, The Editor-in-Chief, American Journal of Educational Research”
What a funny research.
thank you very much for your protection us from predator journals. pleases send me list reputable journals, if you can
wish the best
Many thanks Mr Beall,
The legitimate JOURNAL OF FOOD AND NUTRITION RESEARCH
Has the ISSN: 1336-8672
Thats great since now the 116 journals you listed are out of the WoS :-)
I feel its your personal opinion. I have published 4-5 papers at http://www.ijsr.net and I am happy to receive the service. I have received my higher degree after publishing with them. They personally took care of my paper. Updated me at each and every step. In one of my paper I forgot including references, so they returned me to add references. Even they provided free formatting services to me.
I would like to share that my few friends who simply copy the paper from some or the other sources. They are brilliant using the text changer apps and services available at web. Changes words of original manuscript in such a way that even plagiarism detector don’t identify the infringement. So who would be responsible for this? Atleast IJSR sends apology or retractor letter. What can be expected more?
Hi Dr. Beall and Robert,
I have received the same email. I’m an early stage researcher and I think I have a discrete experience in my field. Anyway, I honestly think that I don’t have published enough relevant work to be part of an editorial board. Therefore an offer to join a legitimate editorial board of a Scopus indexed journal is tempting, even if it is clear from the proposal that the required burden is becoming a contributor and a sponsor of the journal.
So I checked for the current editorial board and I spotted few good and excellent scholars in the list. The strange thing is that the editorial board has 205 members (and I should add also 9 associate and special issue editors ): it seems to me an enormous number, correct me if I am wrong. I estimate that the total authors of published papers in one year is lower than the board members one.
I have therefore checked for 2016 published articles and I found 3 special issues and some regular articles. Apart from few works that at a first glance seems good, most of the regular articles are retractions of chinese-authored articles published in 2014 and 2015. In those years chinese-authored articles were almost the only material published by the journal.
So I was asking myself: it is that a sign of change and goodwill?Are they starting to clear their editorial process? Then I checked the older history (with the limits of the wayback machine) and the main editors are the same from the beginning of 2015.
My final question is: is it possible that some scholars are working to effectively improve the situation of the journal, in good faith, and the retractions are a good sign? or is it that just a continuous predatory approach, where high level scholars were sometimes falling into, and they are not fighting back for lack of knowledge and of time or for the fear to be associated bad practices, even if it is not their fault?
Fun fact: the email wasn’t addressed to Dear Dr. [My Name], but to Dear Dr. [Name of the Regional Editor]
Dear Dr. Bell,
Taylor & Francis publisher and, East African Agricultural and Forestry Journalare predatory or not?
Dear Jeffrey, I received an invitation to publish from the Executive Editor of Bio-protocol (ISSN: 2331-8325), an open access, peer-reviewed e-journal that specializes in curating high quality life science protocols.
Do you have any information about the quality of this journal?
[…] Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2017 […]