Hindawi Publishing Corporation handled this issue very professionally. They must learn from this case and improve their system to make sure that this will never happen again in the future.
Comment on Hindawi’s Scientific World Journal Loses its Impact Factor by Mai Hassan
↧
↧
Comment on Hindawi’s Scientific World Journal Loses its Impact Factor by Mai Hassan
I think before suggesting to add Hindawi to the list of Predatory Publishing we should specify what it believes constitutes acceptable and unacceptable behaviour by publishers.
Spamming in this case for sure is not acceptable, and I think this point has been delivered to Hindawi’s staff after
“The OA Interviews with Dr. Ahmed Hindawi”
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-oa-interviews-ahmed-hindawi-founder.html
and now I think Hindawi’s promotional messages don’t deserve to be singled out for stigmatisation.
↧
Comment on Copying Elsevier by R.V.Krishnakumar
Dear Dr.Guido,
I thought I was satiric. Sorry it sounds ironic. Please visit http://www.naasindia.org and you would find a ‘rating’ range from 6.1 to 10 and while IJPBS will get 6.1, PSNA, Nature and Science will be just 3.9 points away with 10.
↧
Comment on New Journal Publishes Seven Issues of Bogus Articles to Appear Successful by R.V.Krishnakumar
JPAM, OJCST, Ultra Engineer, OJC, Current World Environment, Materials Science Research India, Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia – All by Oriental Scientific Publishing Co. which claims as serving the scientific community for 25 years. All websites copyright years are 2011 or 2012! Dr.Beall, what do you think?
↧
Comment on New Journal Publishes Seven Issues of Bogus Articles to Appear Successful by R.V.Krishnakumar
I came across another journal with the statue of liberty forming the part of the journal logo! – International Journal of Current Science (IJCS). A new problem is that there are joirnals unworthy of any mention in the much dedicated site like this which aims at some serious discussion about PJs (Predatory Journals)
↧
↧
Comment on Copying Elsevier by Guido
Yes, I think I understood your meaning. As a non-native speaker, I guess I mixed up ‘ironic’ and ‘satiric’. Sorry for the confusion.
↧
Comment on Science Target: Targeting Your Author Fees by Roddy MacLeod
Having a mailbox shouldn’t be a reason for a publisher being on your list, and I notice that http://www.sciencetarget.com/site/index.php/article-processing-fees-ijes-2 has no charge for publication, but plagiarism is a reason for not recommending a publisher. Can you elaborate?
↧
Comment on Science Target: Targeting Your Author Fees by R.V.Krishnakumar
I think these publishers should call their stuffs as ‘open access magazines’. Right now, to begin a open access journal, it is enough if one knows how to build a website. Instead, let us say, i) if there is a guideline that they should constitute a corpus of $100,000 initially and keep building it to counter plagiarism related issues, ii) and there would be a Governing Council at the International level with national level bodies….. Well, well, well… Am I speaking sense!!!
↧
Comment on OMICS Publishing Launches New Brand with 53 Journal Titles by K. Witwer
I recently spoke at two conferences organized by this company and had several good networking opportunities that turned into fruitful collaborations with other junior scientists. However, the meetings were generally poorly run. More concerning, several weeks after the first conference, I received an email “reminding” me that I had agreed to submit a research publication. I wrote back that I had not agreed to this and that I furthermore could not justify publishing in a journal that did not list all papers with PubMed. Despite this, they continued to send me messages demanding my submission; most were quite rudely worded, although this could have been partly a language issue.
↧
↧
Comment on List of Publishers by Open Access Resources | Research Impact: Scholarly Communication @ Carleton University
[...] Beall’s List of Predatory Open Access Journals: It’s important to be aware of publishers/journals “that unprofessionally exploit the author-pays model of open access publishing (Gold OA) for their own profit” [...]
↧
Comment on Science Target: Targeting Your Author Fees by Die Hugh
Mr R V Krishnkumar makes some interesting points, however, i) plagiarism simply needs awareness and honesty in the authors; as for the publishers to check for plagiarism doesn’t really need a corpus of $ 100,0000. Google search engine provides quite adequate options to check for plagiarism and it is free to use; and the paid services require a subscription of few hundred dollors per year. ii) scholarly publishing is an ethics and moral based activity doesn’t require hundreds of thousands of dollars. iii) a governing council at an international level may be a good idea to make policies about open access; since the movement is ongoing lets wait and watch.
↧
Comment on Growing Science — The Pride of Ontario? by Die Hugh
Among the issues raised in this section, faulty address along with faulty telephone number sounds bad however the duplicate editor photo might be topographical error; secondly format of the article chosen by the OA journal might resemble the some big journals formats but that does not suffice for the predatory activity.
↧
Comment on Science Target: Targeting Your Author Fees by R.V.Krishnakumar
I am not sure whether anykind of concrete action towards regulating open access publishing is going on anywhere around the world. I think Dr.Beall’s efforts are the first of its kind in identifying such publishing, which is a significant first step. What next?
↧
↧
Comment on Science Target: Targeting Your Author Fees by J.Toth
Maybe an easyer way to find out the (il-)legitimacy of these type of journals & publishing enterprises is to write an email to the listed editors or editorial board members with a “western” name and ask them if the journal not just put their name on the editorial board without their knowledge or consent.
↧
Comment on OA Publisher Offers Author Fee Waivers in Exchange for Citing Its Journals by Predatory publishers – A guide | The Library Blog
[...] The latest way in trying to up the journals impact factor is to buy citations. Some publishers have started to send thank-you e-mails to those who have cited articles from their journals in other publishers’ journals. In these e-mails they say they will not charge you APC if you ever want to publish in one of their journal with the condition that you continue to cite their articles. The aim with this is to increase the number of citations so that the journal’s impact factor will increase. This kind of play with impact factor is unethical and something serious science should not be a part of. Read more of this and other topics on predatory publishers in Jeffery Beall’s blog. [...]
↧
Comment on OA Publisher Offers Author Fee Waivers in Exchange for Citing Its Journals by Tveksamma förlag – release på den engelska versionen | Biblioteksbloggen
[...] Det senaste knepet att höja tidskriftens impact factor är att köpa citeringar. Vissa förlag har börjat skicka tack-meddelanden till dem som har citerat artiklar från dess tidskrifter i andra förlags tidskrifter. I dessa e-postbrev skriver de att de erbjuder gratis publicering av dina kommande artiklar i sina tidskrifter så klart om du citerar deras artiklar tillräckligt många gånger. Syftet med detta förfarande är alltså att öka citeringar så att förlagets tidskrifter och därmed tidskriftens får hög impact factor, vilket är oetiskt. Läs mer om detta och se ett exempel på tack-e-postbrevet i Jeffery Beall’s blogg. [...]
↧
Comment on Cosmic Journals by Roddy MacLeod
A typo in the publisher’s description (written by someone for whom English is probably a second or third language), some over-enthusiastic marketing fluff, and the fact that Cosmic is based in India (which has a rapidly expanding economy and research commmunity) – all true. And it may be starting as a bottom-tier publisher, but every publisher starts at the bottom. This blog seems to be developing an anti-Indian subcontinent bias. It may well be that many predatory publishers are based there, but this is not a reason to dismiss all new publishers from India. Many of your other posts are valuable because they point out true predatory characteristics, or plagiarism, etc. Is there such evidence in the case of Cosmic?
↧
↧
Comment on List of Publishers by Open Access Week: Publishers role in Open Access | Florida Institute of Technology
[...] ‘predatory’ publishers. According to Jeffrey Beall, who publishes a list of publishers he calls ‘predatory’: “Predatory, open-access publishers are those that [...]
↧
Comment on Cosmic Journals by R.V.Krishnakumar
As many as 28 titles from http://interesjournals.org/index.htm. It is difficult to establish plagiarism unless otherwise they are “striking” as indicated by Dr.Beall in a concluding paragraph of a paper on cognitive science’. It is not always easy for anyone to establish plagiarism in subjects in which one is not an expert. But, I am sure there is a pattern in the modus operandi of these journals.
↧
Comment on Cosmic Journals by Dorey, Gerald
Hi Jeffrey
These journals are quite sad. Authors with terrible English but often quite good academic credentials writing rubbish because there is no peer review.
Do you have any stats collected about the country of origin of these troll journals? The majority do seem to be Indian – they always have been great entrepreneurs!
Best wishes
Gerry
Gerald Dorey
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Publisher – Area Studies
Regional Publisher – South Asia
UK office: 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, OX14 4RN, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7017 7902
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com
e-mail: gerald.dorey@tandf.co.uk
Indian office: 912 Tolstoy House, 15-17 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi 110 001, India
Tel: +91 (0)11 4315 5178
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com
e-mail: gerald.dorey@tandf.co.uk
Taylor & Francis is a trading name of Informa UK Limited, registered in England under no. 1072954
↧
