By Dr. Vlad Krotov
Predatory journals are exploitative academic publishing platforms that charge authors high submission fees but fail to provide the legitimate services associated with reputable academic journals, such as peer review and editorial oversight. These journals often promise quick publication times and lack transparency in their operations. The term “predatory” is used because these journals prey on the need of researchers to publish their work for career advancement, academic requirement, or visibility, without actually contributing to the scholarly discourse in a meaningful way. Predatory journals pose significant challenges to the integrity and quality of academic and professional accreditation standards. In this article, we explain how to identify predatory journals and what simple strategies a business school can pursue to prevent faculty from publishing in these journals.
Predatory academic journals come in all shapes and sizes and are not unique to a particular field. However, there are few things that predatory academic journals share in common. Typical characteristics of predatory journals include:
-
- Lack of Peer Review: They often claim to conduct peer review but either do not do it or do it superficially, failing to uphold standards of academic rigor.
- Misleading Metrics: They may claim high impact factors and indexing in reputable databases without actual inclusion or by using misleading metrics.
- Aggressive Marketing: They frequently use spam emails to solicit manuscripts from researchers.
- Unclear Editorial Policies: They have vague or nonexistent editorial policies and practices, making it difficult to understand their review processes or criteria for publication.
- Dubious Practices: They may list scholars as editorial board members without their permission or knowledge, and often have fake or non-existent contact addresses.
- Rapid Publication: They promise rapid publication, which appeals to researchers under pressure to publish but undermines the integrity of the review process.
- High Article Processing Charges (APCs): They charge authors high fees for publishing, often without providing the expected publication services
Predatory journals pose significant challenges to the integrity and quality of academic and professional accreditation standards. Accreditation bodies evaluate academic programs, institutions, and professionals based on various criteria, including research output, publication quality, and contributions to the field. The issues with predatory journals impact these evaluations in several ways:
-
- Dilution of Scholarly Quality: Accreditation relies on the quality of scholarly work produced by an institution or individual. Publications in predatory journals, which lack rigorous peer review, can dilute the overall quality of an institution’s or individual’s scholarly output. This makes it difficult for accreditation bodies to assess the true academic contribution and quality of research.
- Misrepresentation of Academic Productivity: Predatory journals can inflate an individual’s or institution’s publication record, misleading accreditation bodies about the actual academic productivity and impact. This misrepresentation can lead to unwarranted accreditation status or recognition, undermining the credibility of the accreditation process.
- Erosion of Trust: The involvement of faculty, researchers, or institutions with predatory journals can erode trust in their credibility and integrity. For accreditation bodies, associating with entities that lack discernment in publication venues can question their standards and the value of the accreditation they provide.
- Resource Misallocation: Resources spent on publishing in predatory journals are resources wasted, as they do not contribute to the advancement of knowledge or the academic’s reputation in a meaningful way. This misallocation can affect the overall quality of education and research that accreditation bodies seek to ensure.
- Compromised Evaluation Metrics: Accreditation often uses publication records as a metric for evaluating the quality and impact of academic work. Predatory journals, through their lack of quality control and dubious metrics, compromise these evaluation metrics, making it harder for accreditation bodies to rely on publication records as a measure of quality.
- Difficulty in Distinguishing Legitimate Work: The prevalence of predatory journals makes it increasingly difficult for accreditation bodies to distinguish between legitimate and non-legitimate work. This requires them to invest additional resources in vetting publications, which can be both time-consuming and
Researchers are advised to carefully evaluate the credibility of journals before submitting their work, using tools and checklists such as the ABDC List, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Think. Check. Submit., and Beall’s List (though it’s no longer updated, it served as a significant resource for identifying potential predatory publishers).
Moreover, a business school may decide to develop policies that give faculty members credit only for publications that are in journals listed in well-accepted lists, such as ABDC or Cabells. Additional quality criteria may also be applied to these publications.
