Misplaced Pages

#784215

100-572: The CRIStin system includes the Norwegian Scientific Index , a comprehensive government-owned bibliographic database aimed at covering and rating all serious academic publication channels worldwide, including academic journals and publishers . Publication channels may be nominated by Norwegian academics, and the database does not accept self-nominations by publishers. The index includes journal -level ratings and book publisher -level ratings. Publishers and journals may be assigned

200-829: A royal privilege from King Louis XIV on 8 August 1664 to establish the Journal des sçavans . The journal's first issue was published on 5 January 1665. It was aimed at people of letters , and had four main objectives: Soon after, the Royal Society established Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in March 1665, and the Académie des Sciences established the Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences in 1666, which focused on scientific communications. By

300-622: A 2020 systematic review of 93 lists, only three were assessed as evidence-based. Multiple science funders have taken special measures against predatory publishing, especially in terms of national journal rankings . On 18 September 2018, Zbigniew Błocki, the director of the National Science Centre , the largest agency that funds fundamental research in Poland, stated that if articles financed by NCN funds were published in journals not satisfying standards for peer review, then

400-406: A U.S. lawyer said that the threats seemed to be a "publicity stunt" that was meant to "intimidate". Section 66A has been criticised in an India Today editorial for its potential for misuse in "stifling political dissent, crushing speech and ... enabling bullying". Beall could have been sued for defamation , and would not have been able to fall back on truth as a final defense; under section 66A,

500-716: A blacklist of predatory journals (not publishers) in June, and said that access would be by subscription only. The company had started work on its blacklist criteria in early 2016. In July 2017, both a black list and a white list were offered for subscription on their website. In December 2023, a portal titled "Scholarly Criticism" was launched by a few Malaysian and US based research scholars in response to false and erroneous research published by so-called top-tier business journals. The presented criticism significantly provides evidence of little, no, or nescient peer review conducted by journals' editors and publishers. The portal also provides

600-505: A free copy of the book from the journal in exchange for a timely review. Publishers send books to book review editors in the hope that their books will be reviewed. The length and depth of research book reviews varies much from journal to journal, as does the extent of textbook and trade book review. An academic journal's prestige is established over time, and can reflect many factors, some but not all of which are expressible quantitatively. In each academic discipline , some journals receive

700-412: A high number of submissions and opt to restrict how many they publish, keeping the acceptance rate low. Size or prestige are not a guarantee of reliability. In the natural sciences and in the social sciences , the impact factor is an established proxy, measuring the number of later articles citing articles already published in the journal. There are other quantitative measures of prestige, such as

800-428: A journal article will be available for download in two formats: PDF and HTML, although other electronic file types are often supported for supplementary material. Articles are indexed in bibliographic databases as well as by search engines. E-journals allow new types of content to be included in journals, for example, video material, or the data sets on which research has been based. With the growth and development of

900-742: A list of questionable journals analyzed by the editors of the portal. The founders of the portal get inspiration from the commentary authored by Ch. Mahmood Anwar titled "Emergence of false realities about the concept of “Silaturrahim”: an academic social construction perspective". The commentary was published in Tourism Critiques back in 2022. In this commentary, the author floated very important concepts of false information reporting, academic social artifacts, academic social construction, false citation chains, and other related concepts. Since Beall's list closed, other list groups have started. These include Kscien's list, which used Beall's list as

1000-440: A number of the journals on this list, threatened to sue Beall in 2013 and Beall stopped publishing in 2017, citing pressure from his university. A US judge fined OMICS $ 50 million in 2019 stemming from an FTC lawsuit. Some academic journals use the registered report format, which aims to counteract issues such as data dredging and hypothesizing after the results are known. For example, Nature Human Behaviour has adopted

1100-609: A number of trade journals, newspapers and other non-academic publications. In 2021 the National Publication Committee introduced a new level called "level X" for journals and publishers that they are soliciting comments on whether it should be approved or not. Becoming operational in the autumn of 2021, the National Publication Committee linked the creation of level X to concerns regarding the publisher MDPI . The new level became active in September 2021; of

SECTION 10

#1732801157785

1200-556: A particular academic discipline is published. They serve as permanent and transparent forums for the presentation, scrutiny, and discussion of research . They nearly universally require peer review for research articles or other scrutiny from contemporaries competent and established in their respective fields. Content usually takes the form of articles presenting original research , review articles , or book reviews . The purpose of an academic journal, according to Henry Oldenburg (the first editor of Philosophical Transactions of

1300-453: A print journal in structure: there is a table of contents which lists the articles, and many electronic journals still use a volume/issue model, although some titles now publish on a continuous basis. Online journal articles are a specialized form of electronic document : they have the purpose of providing material for academic research and study, and they are formatted approximately like journal articles in traditional printed journals. Often,

1400-468: A profit. They often accept advertising, page and image charges from authors to pay for production costs. On the other hand, some journals are produced by commercial publishers who do make a profit by charging subscriptions to individuals and libraries. They may also sell all of their journals in discipline-specific collections or a variety of other packages. Journal editors tend to have other professional responsibilities, most often as teaching professors. In

1500-454: A publicly disclosed policy on predatory journals. A study in 2015 found that predatory journals rapidly increased their publication volumes from 53,000 in 2010 to an estimated 420,000 articles in 2014, published by around 8,000 active journals. Early on, publishers with more than 100 journals dominated the market, but since 2012 publishers in the 10–99 journal size category have captured the largest market share. As of 2022, almost one third of

1600-598: A publisher on the list and referenced a resurrected version of Beall's list. This version includes Beall's original list and updates by an anonymous purported "postdoctoral researcher in one of the [E]uropean universities [who has] a hands-on experience with predatory journals." At the May 2017 meeting of the Society for Scholarly Publishing , Cabell's International, a company that offers scholarly publishing analytics and other scholarly services, announced that it intended to launch

1700-517: A quarter of the respondents from 112 countries, and across all disciplines and career stages, indicated that they had either published in a predatory journal, participated in a predatory conference, or did not know if they had. The majority of those who did so unknowingly cited a lack of awareness of predatory practices; whereas the majority of those who did so knowingly cited the need to advance their careers." According to one study, 60% of articles published in predatory journals receive no citations over

1800-552: A set of criteria that publishers and journals must comply with to win a place on a 'white list' indicating that they are trustworthy. Beall has been threatened with a lawsuit by a Canadian publisher which appears on the list. He reports that he has been the subject of online harassment for his work on the subject. His list has been criticized for relying heavily on analysis of publishers' web sites, not engaging directly with publishers, and including newly founded but legitimate journals. Beall has responded to these complaints by posting

1900-441: A starting point, updating it to add and remove publishers. In 2020 Ministry of Science and Technology of China ordered Chinese Center of Scientometrics to launch a blacklist called Chinese Early Warning Journal List (EWJL). EWJL classifies journals into three grades: low, medium or high risk, rather than two (predatory or not) like most other lists. Nevertheless, there is an ongoing criticism of this list as well. According to

2000-437: A study in a given field, or for current awareness of those already in the field. Reviews of scholarly books are checks upon the research books published by scholars; unlike articles, book reviews tend to be solicited. Journals typically have a separate book review editor determining which new books to review and by whom. If an outside scholar accepts the book review editor's request for a book review, he or she generally receives

2100-411: A third of those journals engaging in fraudulent editorial practices. The root cause of exploitative practices is the author-facing article-processing charge (APC) business model, in which authors are charged to publish rather than to read. Such a model provides incentives for publishers to focus on the quantity of articles published, rather than their quality. APCs have gained increasing popularity in

SECTION 20

#1732801157785

2200-543: Is a comprehensive Norwegian bibliographic database established by the Norwegian government , aimed at covering all academic publication channels worldwide, i.e. academic journals , series with ISSN, and scholarly presses . It is operated by the government-owned company Norwegian Centre for Research Data on behalf of the Royal Ministry of Education and Research , and forms one of the key parts that together make up

2300-688: Is a spectrum rather than a binary phenomenon. In the same issue of a journal it is possible to find articles which meet the highest criteria for scientific integrity, and articles which have one or more unethical issues. In March 2008, Gunther Eysenbach , publisher of an early open-access journal, drew attention to what he called " black sheep among open-access publishers and journals" and highlighted in his blog publishers and journals which resorted to excessive spam to attract authors and editors, criticizing in particular Bentham Science Publishers , Dove Medical Press , and Libertas Academica . In July 2008, Richard Poynder's interview series brought attention to

2400-608: Is also used in other countries than Norway, both formally and informally. For example, South Africa started using the index in 2016. The Norwegian Scientific Index also forms the basis for the Nordic List, a joint Nordic bibliographic database that is developed under the auspices of the Nordic Council and the governments of the Nordic countries . As of February 2023, the Nordic List website from its 2018 presentation

2500-535: Is an exploitative academic publishing business model, where the journal or publisher prioritizes self-interest at the expense of scholarship. It is characterized by misleading information, deviates from the standard peer-review process, is highly non-transparent, and often utilizes aggressive solicitation practices. The phenomenon of "open-access predatory publishers" was first noticed by Jeffrey Beall around 2012, when he described "publishers that are ready to publish any article for payment". However, criticisms about

2600-439: Is an outlier in two consecutive years according to any of three criteria comparing it with peer journals in its subject field Web of Science implemented somewhat similar criteria, although they do not specify any quantitative metrics. Also, Web of Science (unlike Scopus) checks for excessive citations of the works authored by the journal board members. As of summer 2024 SciFinder (and Chemical Abstract Service ) do not have

2700-673: Is good at spotting publishers with poor quality control." However, the managing director of DOAJ, Lars Bjørnshauge, estimates that questionable publishing probably accounts for fewer than 1% of all author-pays, open-access papers, a proportion far lower than Beall's estimate of 5–10%. Instead of relying on blacklists, Bjørnshauge argues that open-access associations such as the DOAJ and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association should adopt more responsibility for policing publishers: they should lay out

2800-494: Is intended to cover at least 80% of all serious journals and publishers in a given discipline. Level 2 is the highest rating and is reserved for the internationally most prestigious journals and publishers within the discipline. "Level 2" status is granted by national expert committees for each discipline, and may be given to a maximum of 20% of all publication channels in a given discipline. Funding of research institutions in Norway

2900-888: Is not functional. The responsibility for the European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences, now called ERIH PLUS , was transferred from the European Science Foundation to the Norwegian Centre for Research Data in 2014 and is now available on the same website as the Norwegian Scientific Index. Academic journal An academic journal or scholarly journal is a periodical publication in which scholarship relating to

3000-936: Is not possible for the OMICS Group to proceed against Beall under section 66A, but it could mount a defamation case. Finally, in August 2016, OMICS was sued for "deceptive business practices related to journal publishing and scientific conferences" by the Federal Trade Commission (a US government agency), who won an initial court ruling in November 2017. Beall's list was used as an authoritative source by South Africa's Department of Higher Education and Training in maintaining its list of accredited journals: articles published in those journals will determine funding levels for their authors; however, journals identified as predatory will be removed from this list. ProQuest

3100-531: Is now a sister project of the Norwegian Scientific Index, after it was transferred from the European Science Foundation to the Norwegian Centre for Research Data in 2014. The CRIStin system traces its roots to the research documentation system of the University of Oslo , that was developed during the 1990s and known as Forskningsdokumentasjon ved Universitetet i Oslo ("Research Documentation at

CRIStin - Misplaced Pages Continue

3200-464: Is partially tied to the Norwegian Scientific Index, and only recognised "level 1" or "level 2" publications generate funding. "Level 2" publications generate significantly increased funding compared to "level 1" publications. Journals and publishers that are designated as not academic are identified as "level 0," which means that they don't count in the official academic career system or public funding of research institutions. The "0" rating may imply that

3300-618: Is reviewing all journals on Beall's list, and has started removing them from the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences . In January 2017, Beall shut down his blog and removed all its content, citing pressure from his employer. Beall's supervisor wrote a response stating that he did not pressure Beall to discontinue his work, or threaten his employment; and had tried hard to support Beall's academic freedom. In 2017, Ramzi Hakami reported on his own successful attempt to get an intentionally poor paper accepted by

3400-607: The Improbable Research blog had found that Scientific Research Publishing 's journals duplicated papers already published elsewhere; the case was subsequently reported in Nature . In 2010, Cornell University graduate student Phil Davis (editor of the Scholarly Kitchen blog) submitted a manuscript consisting of computer-generated nonsense (using SCIgen ), which was accepted for a fee (but withdrawn by

3500-765: The Directory of Open Access Journals and complying with a standardised set of conditions. The majority of predatory OA publishers appear to be based in Asia and Africa, but in one study over half of authors publishing in them were found to be from "higher-income or upper-middle-income countries". It has been argued that authors who publish in predatory journals may do so unwittingly without actual unethical perspective, due to concerns that North American and European journals might be prejudiced against scholars from non-Western countries, high publication pressure or lack of research proficiency. Hence predatory publishing also questions

3600-498: The OMICS Group, iMedPub , Conference Series , and the individual Srinubabu Gedela, an Indian national who is president of the companies. In the lawsuit, the defendants are accused of "deceiving academics and researchers about the nature of its publications and hiding publication fees ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars". The FTC was also responding to pressure to take action against predatory publishers. Attorneys for

3700-648: The SCImago Journal Rank , CiteScore , Eigenfactor , and Altmetrics . In the Anglo-American humanities , there is no tradition (as there is in the sciences) of giving impact-factors that could be used in establishing a journal's prestige. Recent moves have been made by the European Science Foundation (ESF) to change the situation, resulting in the publication of preliminary lists for the ranking of academic journals in

3800-436: The quantitative social sciences vary in form and function from journals of the humanities and qualitative social sciences; their specific aspects are separately discussed. The first academic journal was Journal des sçavans (January 1665), followed soon after by Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (March 1665), and Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences (1666). The first fully peer-reviewed journal

3900-484: The "control" journals which "must meet certain standards of quality, including ethical publishing practices." Among journals sampled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), 8 of 120 accepted Szust. The DOAJ has since removed some of the affected journals in a 2016 purge. None of the 120 sampled journals listed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) offered Szust the position. The results of

4000-466: The 100 largest publishers (by journal count) could be deemed predatory. The regional distribution of both the publisher's country and authorship is highly skewed, with three-quarters of the authors from Asia or Africa. Authors paid an average fee of US $ 178 each for articles to be published rapidly without review, typically within two to three months of submission. As reported in 2019, some 5% of Italian researchers have published in predatory journals, with

4100-531: The 13 initial journals included in the level, five were MDPI journals. In 2022, 10 of the 13 initial journals are rated as non-academic (level 0), while one ( Geosciences ) has been rated as academic (level 1). As of May 2022, there were 7 journals in the list, out of which 2 from the initial journals. As of February 2024, there is one publisher ( Bentham Science Publishers and 46 individual journals in this list, including 13 from MDPI, nine from Hindawi , and seven from Elsevier . The Norwegian Scientific Index

CRIStin - Misplaced Pages Continue

4200-476: The CRIStin system. The index divides journals and publishers considered to meet academic quality criteria (including peer review) into "level 1" and "level 2." Journals and publishers are rated separately, with journal-level ratings applying to journal publications and publisher-level ratings applying to books. Level 1 is the standard rating for publication channels considered to meet academic quality criteria, and

4300-594: The English language, the composition of the editorial board or the rigour of the peer review process itself tend to favour familiar content from the "centre" rather than the "periphery". It is thus important to distinguish between exploitative publishers and journals – whether OA or not – and legitimate OA initiatives with varying standards in digital publishing, but which may improve and disseminate epistemic contents. Lists of journals or publishers deemed either acceptable or unacceptable have been published. Beall's List

4400-878: The FTC won the suit in a summary judgement and was awarded $ 50,130,811 in damages and a broad injunction against OMICS practices. It is unlikely that the FTC will ever collect the award, since the rulings of US courts are not enforceable in India, and since OMICS does not have property in the US. Recognizing common characteristics of predatory publishers can help to avoid them. Complaints that are associated with predatory open-access publishing include: Predatory publishers have also been compared to vanity presses . In 2015, Jeffrey Beall used 26 criteria related to poor journal standards and practices, 9 related to journal editors and staff members, 7 related to ethics and integrity, 6 related to

4500-614: The Foundations to issue their own lists of acceptable journals; (2) making sure that the results of their funded works are readily discovered by other people, as Web of Science and Scopus are subscribed to by most reputable institutions. However, in parallel with the withdrawal of Clarivate from Russia in 2022 and the pause in Elsevier services from 2022 onwards, the Web of Science and Scopus listings are no longer considered as essential by

4600-680: The Internet, there has been a growth in the number of new digital-only journals. A subset of these journals exist as Open Access titles, meaning that they are free to access for all, and have Creative Commons licences which permit the reproduction of content in different ways. High quality open access journals are listed in Directory of Open Access Journals . Most, however, continue to exist as subscription journals, for which libraries, organisations and individuals purchase access. Predatory open-access publishing Predatory publishing , also write-only publishing or deceptive publishing ,

4700-518: The Middle East." The demonstration of unethical practices in the OA publishing industry has also attracted considerable media attention. In 2013, John Bohannon , a staff writer for the journal Science and for popular science publications, tested the open-access system by submitting to a number of such journals a deeply flawed paper on the purported effect of a lichen constituent, and published

4800-567: The Norwegian Scientific Index is also used in other countries than Norway, e.g. in Sweden and South Africa , and it is the model of similar indices in other countries, including Denmark . It also serves as the basis for a joint Nordic bibliographic database that is being developed under the auspices of the Nordic governments and the Nordic Council . Additionally, the European database ERIH PLUS

4900-421: The OMICS Group published a response on their website, claiming "your FTC allegations are baseless. Further we understand that FTC working towards favoring some subscription based journals publishers who are earring [ sic ] Billions of dollars rom [ sic ] scientists literature", suggesting that corporations in the scientific publishing business were behind the allegations. In March 2019,

5000-474: The Royal Society ), is to give researchers a venue to "impart their knowledge to one another, and contribute what they can to the Grand design of improving natural knowledge, and perfecting all Philosophical Arts, and Sciences." The term academic journal applies to scholarly publications in all fields; this article discusses the aspects common to all academic field journals. Scientific journals and journals of

5100-632: The Russian agencies. More transparent peer review, such as open peer review and post-publication peer review , has been advocated to combat predatory journals. Others have argued instead that the discussion on predatory journals should not be turned "into a debate over the shortcomings of peer review—it is nothing of the sort. It is about fraud, deception, and irresponsibility..." In an effort to "set apart legitimate journals and publishers from non-legitimate ones", principles of transparency and best practice have been identified and issued collectively by

SECTION 50

#1732801157785

5200-538: The University of Oslo"), abbreviated ForskDok. Until 2010/2011 Norway had two competing research documentation databases. Almost all colleges and universities used the BIBSYS FORSKDOK database, that was developed from 1991 as part of the national BIBSYS system, itself established in 1972. The University of Oslo, the country's preeminent university, chose to develop its own and similarly named system. In 2004,

5300-636: The article produce reports upon the content, style, and other factors, which inform the editors' publication decisions. Though these reports are generally confidential, some journals and publishers also practice public peer review . The editors either choose to reject the article, ask for a revision and resubmission, or accept the article for publication. Even accepted articles are often subjected to further (sometimes considerable) editing by journal editorial staff before they appear in print. The peer review can take from several weeks to several months. Review articles, also called "reviews of progress", are checks on

5400-821: The author deposits a paper in a disciplinary or institutional repository where it can be searched for and read, or via publishing it in a free open access journal , which does not charge for subscriptions , being either subsidized or financed by a publication fee . Given the goal of sharing scientific research to speed advances, open access has affected science journals more than humanities journals. Commercial publishers are experimenting with open access models, but are trying to protect their subscription revenues. The much lower entry cost of on-line publishing has also raised concerns of an increase in publication of "junk" journals with lower publishing standards. These journals, often with names chosen as similar to well-established publications, solicit articles via e-mail and then charge

5500-416: The author to publish an article, often with no sign of actual review . Jeffrey Beall , a research librarian at the University of Colorado , has compiled a list of what he considers to be "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers"; the list numbered over 300 journals as of April 2013, but he estimates that there may be thousands. The OMICS Publishing Group , which publishes

5600-404: The author). Predatory publishers have been reported to hold submissions hostage, refusing to allow them to be withdrawn and thereby preventing submission in another journal. Predatory publishing does not refer to a homogeneous category of practices. The name itself was coined by American librarian Jeffrey Beall who created a list of "deceptive and fraudulent" Open Access (OA) publishers, which

5700-438: The authors' personal judgement, rather than objective evidence. Lists of acceptable sources, on the other hand, have been criticized as not being relevant to how academics evaluate journals. Directory of Open Access Journals is an example of a free whitelist. Other lists of pre-approved journals are available from large research funders. University of Colorado Denver librarian and researcher Jeffrey Beall , who coined

5800-410: The case of the largest journals, there are paid staff assisting in the editing. The production of the journals is almost always done by publisher-paid staff. Humanities and social science academic journals are usually subsidized by universities or professional organization. The cost and value proposition of subscription to academic journals is being continuously re-assessed by institutions worldwide. In

5900-612: The context of the big deal cancellations by several library systems in the world, data analysis tools like Unpaywall Journals are used by libraries to estimate the specific cost and value of the various options: libraries can avoid subscriptions for materials already served by instant open access via open archives like PubMed Central. The Internet has revolutionized the production of, and access to, academic journals, with their contents available online via services subscribed to by academic libraries . Individual articles are subject-indexed in databases such as Google Scholar . Some of

6000-585: The criteria he uses to generate the list, as well as instituting an anonymous three-person review body to which publishers can appeal to be removed from the list. For example, a 2010 re-evaluation resulted in some journals being removed from Beall's list. In 2013, the OMICS Publishing Group threatened to sue Beall for $ 1 billion for his "ridiculous, baseless, [and] impertinent" inclusion of them on his list, which "smacks of literal unprofessionalism and arrogance". An unedited sentence from

6100-406: The criteria, "but the more points on the list that apply to the journal at hand, the more sceptical you should be." The full list is quoted below: Scholar Aamir Raoof Memon proposed the following criteria of predatory publishing: Many scientific abstract and citation databases implemented policies to identify and combat predatory journals. For example, Scopus automatically flags a journal that

SECTION 60

#1732801157785

6200-470: The end of the 18th century, nearly 500 such periodicals had been published, the vast majority coming from Germany (304 periodicals), France (53), and England (34). Several of those publications, in particular the German journals, tended to be short-lived (under five years). A.J. Meadows has estimated the proliferation of journals to reach 10,000 journals in 1950, and 71,000 in 1987. Michael Mabe wrote that

6300-399: The enormity of OMICS's editorial practices". OMICS' lawyers stated that damages were being pursued under section 66A of India's Information Technology Act, 2000 , which makes it illegal to use a computer to publish "any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character" or to publish false information. The letter stated that three years in prison was a possible penalty, although

6400-491: The estimates will vary depending on the definition of what exactly counts as a scholarly publication, but that the growth rate has been "remarkably consistent over time", with an average rate of 3.46% per year from 1800 to 2003. In 1733, Medical Essays and Observations was established by the Medical Society of Edinburgh as the first fully peer-reviewed journal. Peer review was introduced as an attempt to increase

6500-490: The experiment were published in Nature in March 2017, and widely presented in the press. SCIgen , a computer program that randomly generates academic computer science papers using context-free grammar , has generated papers that have been accepted by a number of predatory journals as well as predatory conferences . On 25 August 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a lawsuit against

6600-486: The field of library and information science , even top tier non-OA journals could be qualified as predatory. Similarly, another study reported on the difficulties of demarcating predatory and non-predatory journals in biomedicine . One librarian wrote that Beall's list "attempts a binary division of this complex gold rush: the good and the bad. Yet many of the criteria used are either impossible to quantify..., or can be found to apply as often to established OA journals as to

6700-434: The first megajournal . There are two kinds of article or paper submissions in academia : solicited, where an individual has been invited to submit work either through direct contact or through a general submissions call, and unsolicited, where an individual submits a work for potential publication without directly being asked to do so. Upon receipt of a submitted article, editors at the journal determine whether to reject

6800-450: The five-year period following publication. Actors seeking to maintain the scholarly ecosystem have sought to minimize the influence of predatory publishing through the use of blacklists such as Beall's List and Cabell's blacklist , as well as through whitelists such as the Directory of Open Access Journals . Nevertheless, identifying (and even providing a quantitative definition) of predatory journals remains difficult, because it

6900-408: The geopolitical and commercial context of scholarly knowledge production. Nigerian researchers, for example, publish in predatory journals due to the pressure to publish internationally while having little to no access to Western international journals, or due to the often higher APCs practiced by mainstream OA journals. More generally, the criteria adopted by high JIF journals, including the quality of

7000-641: The grant numbers would have to be removed from the publications and funds would have to be returned to the NCN. Both the Russian Science Foundation and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research require their grant recipients to publish only in the journals included into either Web of Science or Scopus databases. This policy aims at (1) preventing the researchers from falling into the traps of predatory publishers, without having

7100-424: The humanities. These rankings have been severely criticized, notably by history and sociology of science British journals that have published a common editorial entitled "Journals under Threat". Though it did not prevent ESF and some national organizations from proposing journal rankings , it largely prevented their use as evaluation tools. In some disciplines such as knowledge management / intellectual capital ,

7200-569: The label "predatory" have been raised. A lengthy review of the controversy started by Beall appears in The Journal of Academic Librarianship . Predatory publishers are so regarded because scholars are tricked into publishing with them, although some authors may be aware that the journal is poor quality or even fraudulent but publish in them anyway. New scholars from developing countries are said to be especially at risk of being misled by predatory publishers. A 2022 report found that "nearly

7300-705: The lack of a well-established journal ranking system is perceived by academics as "a major obstacle on the way to tenure, promotion and achievement recognition". Conversely, a significant number of scientists and organizations consider the pursuit of impact factor calculations as inimical to the goals of science, and have signed the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment to limit its use. Three categories of techniques have developed to assess journal quality and create journal rankings: Many academic journals are subsidized by universities or professional organizations, and do not exist to make

7400-575: The last two decades as a business model for OA, due to the guaranteed revenue streams they offer, as well as a lack of competitive pricing within the OA market, which allows vendors full control over how much they choose to charge. Ultimately, quality control relies on good editorial policies and their enforcement, and the conflict between rigorous scholarship and profit can be successfully managed by selecting which articles are published purely based on (peer-reviewed) methodological quality. Most OA publishers ensure their quality by registering their titles in

7500-460: The letter read: "Let us at the outset warn you that this is a very perilous journey for you and you will be completely exposing yourself to serious legal implications including criminal cases lunched [ sic ] against you in INDIA and USA." Beall responded that the letter was "poorly written and personally threatening" and expressed his opinion that the letter "is an attempt to detract from

7600-514: The new entrants in this area... Some of the criteria seem to make First World assumptions that aren't valid worldwide." Beall differed with these opinions and wrote a letter of rebuttal in mid-2015. Following the Who's Afraid of Peer Review? investigation, the DOAJ has tightened up its inclusion criteria, with the purpose of serving as a whitelist , very much like Beall's has been a blacklist . The investigation found that "the results show that Beall

7700-552: The objection that "(w)hether it's fair to classify all these journals and publishers as 'predatory' is an open question—several shades of gray may be distinguishable." Beall's analyses have been called sweeping generalizations with no supporting evidence, and he has also been criticized for being biased against open-access journals from less economically developed countries. A 2018 study has shown that Beall's criteria of "predatory" publishing were in no way limited to OA publishers and that, applying them to both OA and non-OA journals in

7800-746: The other hand, they also list journals with subpar standards of peer review and linguistic correction. Studies using Beall's list, or his definitions, report an exponential growth in predatory journals since 2010. A 2020 study has found hundreds of scientists say they have reviewed papers for journals termed 'predatory' — although they might not know it. An analysis of the Publons has found that it hosts at least 6,000 records of reviews for more than 1,000 predatory journals. "The researchers who review most for these titles tend to be young, inexperienced and affiliated with institutions in low-income nations in Africa and

7900-636: The overall number of citations, how quickly articles are cited, and the average " half-life " of articles. Clarivate Analytics ' Journal Citation Reports , which among other features, computes an impact factor for academic journals, draws data for computation from the Science Citation Index Expanded (for natural science journals), and from the Social Sciences Citation Index (for social science journals). Several other metrics are also used, including

8000-456: The paper resulting from this peer-reviewed procedure will be published, regardless of the study outcomes." Some journals are born digital in that they are solely published on the web and in a digital format. Though most electronic journals originated as print journals, which subsequently evolved to have an electronic version, while still maintaining a print component, others eventually became electronic-only. An e-journal closely resembles

8100-515: The practices of new publishers who were "better able to exploit the opportunities of the new environment." Doubts about honesty and scams in a subset of open-access journals continued to be raised in 2009. Concerns for spamming practices from these journals prompted leading open-access publishers to create the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association in 2008. In another early precedent, in 2009

8200-422: The publication channel lacks adequate peer review or that it in some other way doesn't meet basic quality standards for academic journals, that it is a trade journal with no academic aspirations or some other form of entirely non-academic publication, or that it is regarded as predatory . Such publication channels are not systematically included in the index, and the rating may, but doesn't necessarily, indicate that

8300-414: The publication channel was nominated for "level 1" status and failed to be approved as such, or that it has been downgraded from "level 1" status, e.g. due to predatory publishing practices. Some Norwegian publications are included in the database and identified as level 0 mainly for legacy reasons, that is, they were included in the database's predecessors before the rating system was invented; they include

8400-425: The publisher's business practices, and 6 'other' general criteria related to publishers. He also listed 26 additional practices, which were 'reflective of poor journal standards' which were not necessarily indicative of predatory behaviour. In 2016, researchers Stefan Eriksson and Gert Helgesson identified 25 signs of predatory publishing. They warn that a journal will not necessarily be predatory if they meet one of

8500-432: The quality and pertinence of submissions. Other important events in the history of academic journals include the establishment of Nature (1869) and Science (1880), the establishment of Postmodern Culture in 1990 as the first online-only journal , the foundation of arXiv in 1991 for the dissemination of preprints to be discussed prior to publication in a journal, and the establishment of PLOS One in 2006 as

8600-402: The rating 1 (standard rating for publication channels that meet basic academic quality criteria), 2 (rating for internationally leading publication channels), 0 (non-academic) or X (possibly predatory publication channels). The database was started at the University of Oslo , but later became a national system operated on behalf of the government. As the first and largest database of its kind,

8700-495: The registered report format, as it "shift[s] the emphasis from the results of research to the questions that guide the research and the methods used to answer them". The European Journal of Personality defines this format: "In a registered report, authors create a study proposal that includes theoretical and empirical background, research questions/hypotheses, and pilot data (if available). Upon submission, this proposal will then be reviewed prior to data collection, and if accepted,

8800-418: The research documentation system of the University of Oslo formed the basis for a joint system, renamed Frida, for the University of Oslo and the then three other Norwegian universities, but excluding the country's many colleges and other research institutions. In 2010, Frida was transferred to the government and became a national research documentation system, and was renamed CRIStin. The BIBSYS FORSKDOK database

8900-511: The research published in journals. Some journals are devoted entirely to review articles, some contain a few in each issue, and others do not publish review articles. Such reviews often cover the research from the preceding year, some for longer or shorter terms; some are devoted to specific topics, some to general surveys. Some reviews are enumerative , listing all significant articles in a given subject; others are selective, including only what they think worthwhile. Yet others are evaluative, judging

9000-532: The results in a paper called, " Who's Afraid of Peer Review? ". About 60% of those journals, including journals of Elsevier , SAGE , Wolters Kluwer (through its subsidiary Medknow ), and several universities, accepted the faked medical paper. PLOS ONE and Hindawi rejected it. In 2015, four researchers created a fictitious sub-par scientist named Anna O. Szust ( oszust is Polish for "fraudster"), and applied on her behalf for an editor position to 360 scholarly journals. Szust's qualifications were dismal for

9100-508: The role of an editor; she had never published a single article and had no editorial experience. The books and book chapters listed on her CV were made-up, as were the publishing houses that published the books. One-third of the journals to which Szust applied were sampled from Beall's List of predatory journals. Forty of these predatory journals accepted Szust as editor without any background vetting and often within days or even hours. By comparison, she received minimal to no positive response from

9200-429: The smallest, most specialized journals are prepared in-house, by an academic department, and published only online – this has sometimes been in the blog format, though some, like the open access journal Internet Archaeology , use the medium to embed searchable datasets, 3D models, and interactive mapping. Currently, there is a movement in higher education encouraging open access, either via self archiving , whereby

9300-440: The state of progress in the subject field. Some journals are published in series, each covering a complete subject field year, or covering specific fields through several years. Unlike original research articles, review articles tend to be solicited or "peer-invited" submissions, often planned years in advance, which may themselves go through a peer-review process once received. They are typically relied upon by students beginning

9400-402: The submission outright or begin the process of peer review . In the latter case, the submission becomes subject to review by outside scholars of the editor's choosing who typically remain anonymous. The number of these peer reviewers (or "referees") varies according to each journal's editorial practice – typically, no fewer than two, though sometimes three or more, experts in the subject matter of

9500-491: The term "predatory publishing", first published his list of predatory publishers in 2010. Beall's list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers attempted to identify scholarly open-access publishers with questionable practices. In 2013, Nature reported that Beall's list and web site were "widely read by librarians, researchers, and open-access advocates, many of whom applaud his efforts to reveal shady publishing practices." Others have raised

9600-463: The truth of any information is irrelevant if it is grossly offensive. In an unrelated case in 2015, Section 66A was struck down by the Supreme Court of India , which found that it had no proximate connection to public order, "arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free speech", and that the description of offences is "open-ended, undefined and vague." As such, it

9700-545: Was Medical Essays and Observations (1733). The idea of a published journal with the purpose of "[letting] people know what is happening in the Republic of Letters " was first conceived by François Eudes de Mézeray in 1663. A publication titled Journal littéraire général was supposed to be published to fulfill that goal, but never was. Humanist scholar Denis de Sallo (under the pseudonym "Sieur de Hédouville") and printer Jean Cusson took Mazerai's idea, and obtained

9800-401: Was an example of a free blacklist, and Cabells' Predatory Reports is an example of a paid blacklist database. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommends against blindly trusting any list of fake or predatory journals, especially if they do not publish the criteria by which journals are evaluated. Some lists of purported predatory publishers have been criticized for being based on

9900-577: Was then closed in 2011. CRIStin is being integrated into the National Science Archive ( Nasjonalt vitenarkiv ). Level x are publication channels where CRIStin are uncertain whether the publication channel should be approved or not, in light of current criteria and available information. As long as the publication channel are at level X, the level it had before will be the counting level in terms of publication points. The Norwegian Scientific Index (Norwegian: Norsk vitenskapsindeks , NVI)

10000-498: Was used as reference until withdrawn in 2017. The term has been reused since for a new for-profit database by Cabell's International . On the one hand, Beall's list as well as Cabell's International database do include truly fraudulent and deceptive OA publishers that pretend to provide services (in particular quality peer review) which they do not implement, show fictive editorial boards and/or ISSN numbers, use dubious marketing and spamming techniques, or even hijacking known titles. On

#784215