“Yet, even leaving the Open Access versus Subscription argument aside, it is simply ludicrous to blame the countless high quality ethical open access publishers for the predatory journals.”
“Publicly, Mr. Beall has put most of the blame on his own university [for the demise of his blacklist of predatory journals]. As his professional home, that’s where he felt the longest and most direct pressure. Despite being a tenured associate professor of library science, Mr. Beall has spent the past two years working out of a small cubicle similar to a student’s study carrel, in daily fear, he says, of a new supervisor’s threats to make his conditions much worse.
The university, for its part, has said it values Mr. Beall’s work on his list, has spent many years defending it, and provides him a work space similar to that of other librarians. “There have been no documented cases of internal threats against him that leadership or university counsel is aware of,” says Emily Williams, a university spokeswoman.
“They’re trying to make me as uncomfortable as possible.” Mr. Beall insists otherwise. “They’re trying to make me as uncomfortable as possible,” he said in an interview from an empty room down the hall, where he escapes for private conversations.
But the Swiss publisher angry that it had showed up on his blacklist, Frontiers Media, may have played an even bigger role….”
“‘Common wisdom,’ according to the authors of a new piece in Nature, “assumes that the hazard of predatory publishing is restricted mainly to the developing world.” But the authors of the new paper, led by David Moher of the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, found that more than half — 57% — of the 2,000 articles published in journals they determined were predatory were from high-income countries. In fact, the U.S. was second only to India in number of articles published in such journals. We asked Moher, who founded Ottawa Hospital’s Centre for Journalology in 2015, a few questions about the new work.”
“Now, a new twist is emerging, and that seems to be that PubMed may be consciously or unwittingly acting as a facilitator of predatory or unscrupulous publishing.
In a paper published in Neuroscience, the authors analyzing the neurology and neuroscience journals included in PubMed found that:
- Twenty-five predatory neurology journals were indexed in PubMed, accounting for 24.7% of all predatory neurology journals.
- Fourteen predatory neuroscience journals were indexed in PubMed, accounting for 16.1% of all predatory neuroscience journals.
- Only one of the 188 predatory neuroscience or neurology journals appeared in the DOAJ index.
- Only 54.6% of the journals deemed predatory in neuroscience actually contained articles.”
Following rapid development in the economy and huge investment in R&D, China is now widely recognised as one of the leading countries of the world in terms of the number of published journals and scientific articles. In 2015, there were over 10,000 journals in China, of which 4983 (49.76%) were in Science and Technology, according to the “Statistical Data of Chinese Science and Technology Papers 2015.
“Studies have shown that the academic publishing industry achieved impressive revenue levels of approximately USD5,000 per published article in 2011.
In this multi-billion dollar business, the profit of each article was estimated to be between USD3,500 and USD4,000. Even for open-access publishers which charge a much lower fee, the average price per article still hovered around USD660 in the same year. However, the world of academic publishing is not as blissful as many aspiring academicians and researchers would like to believe. In reality, the business of scientific publishing is extremely lucrative.”
“It is interesting to note that since the introduction of new criteria for DOAJ listing in March 2014, we have received the highest number of new applications from Open Access journal publishers in India, followed by those in Indonesia, USA, Brazil and Iran. From around 1600 new applications received from India since March 2014 only 4% were accepted, with 78% of the applications rejected for various reasons and approximately 18% still in process….”
In 2014 over 400,000 articles were published in about 8000 journals that many regard as predatory. The term “predatory publishers” was first used by Jeffrey Beall of the University of Colorado, who until recently documented this phenomenon on his blog and in an annual list. Although this term, and variants such as “predatory journals”, are widely used, they have been criticised. One problem is that the term predator may cover a spectrum of organizations, business activities and publications ranging from the amateurish but genuine to the deliberately misleading.