New definition of predatory publishers: Let's see how everybody's darling, Elsevier, fares here: 1. entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship Elsevier consistently values mega-profits over scholarship. Check.
Ok here is it: an international consensus definition of predatory journals. This represents a ton of work from a truly international and interdisciplinary group.
1/ This new group definition of "predatory journal" is well-done, considering the nuances and difficulties. The article is also a good discussion of those nuances and difficulties.
The lack of an agreed definition of 'predatory publishing' is a major barrier to combating it.
What is a predatory journal? Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition that can protect scholarship. Read it here: #predatorypublishing
Define what predatory journals actually are in order to combat them.
The purveyors of confusion and misinformation—predatory journals—need to be eliminated. The 1st step is to define them, as and an international group has soundly laid out #openaccess
Consensus definition of #predatoryjournals is out in , product of Delphi process & summit in Ottawa led by , , , of , , & Samantha Cukier. I took part & I'm a co-author of the commentary
This ‘definition’ of predatory publishers raises hard questions for all academic journals.
Predatory journals prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by misleading information, deviation from best editorial practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive & indiscriminate solicitation practices
Glad to see the Ottawa cabal has arrived at a definition of 'predatory publishing' that clearly includes Elsevier. "Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship..."😉
ICYMI: "Predatory journals: no definition, no defence" - Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of discussion, 18 questions and 3 rounds to reach.
I think a much better strategy here would be to identify examples of bad practices by specific actors, rather than a general binary separation between 'predatory' and not. This requires argumentation rather than another consensus-building definition.
Comment: One barrier to combating predatory journals is that there’s no definition. Leading scholars and publishers have agreed on a definition after hours of discussions.
Comment: One barrier to combating predatory journals is that there’s no definition. Leading scholars and publishers have agreed on a definition after hours of discussions.
Unsure whether the journal you're considering is predatory? Watch out 4: 🚨False/misleading journal info ⚠️Doesn't follow best editorial and publishing practice 🚩Not transparent about fees, peer review & editorial process 🐍Aggressively soliciting papers
The #delphi survey study that we conducted as part of the development of a consensus definition of #predatoryjournals is now published! Check it out: The definition paper can be read here:
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence! I am happy to have contributed to this paper describing a consensus definition of predatory journals/publishers.
1/4 Our group is developing a one stop shop resource website to address #predatoryjournals. This work builds from our published consensus definition of what a predatory journal is. Please
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of discussion, 18 questions and 3 rounds to reach.
this is a reasonable attempt to categorize journals, although there is no reason for "predatory" to be a dichotomous indicator. But I think we wouldn't need this if we could simply see who is writing the reviews, and what they're saying.
"Pred journals are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship & are characterized by false or misleading info, deviation from best editorial & pub practices, a lack of transparency & use of aggressive solicitation practices.”
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence - article in today's Nature Magazine. One way to solve this might be to move to open peer review reports &, ideally, disclose the names of the reviewers - a model used by and others
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence [Dec 11,2019] et al. #scicomm HT Predatory journals are a global threat.
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals are a global threat. #ScienceJournals #Publishing #ScienceResearch #PredatoryJournals
#Predatoryjournals: no definition, no defence! Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of discussion, 18 questions and 3 rounds to reach.
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Towards a definition of predatory journals/publishers: . What is not clear to me is whether all criteria should be met. I also feel that it is a bit a mix of definition and operationalization. . Would love to see those separated.
"Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of discussion, 18 questions and 3 rounds to reach."
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
The recent consensus definition the authors cite (& which I co-authored with some of them ) left out peer review quality because measuring this is presently too subjective: this kind of research helps fill that gap. Using Publons data is innovative. [2/17]
Have the people who defined "predatory publishers" ever had a look ? Speaking about "deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency" retracted papers in the most "prestigious journals"
This piece reports that participants including scholars, librarians, and publishers have agreed upon a definition of predatory publishing in order to protect scholarship.
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence, by Agnes Grudniewicz (⁦⁩ ), David Moher (⁦⁩ ), Kelly D. Cobey (⁦⁩) and 32 co-authors / ⁦
offers a possible set of criteria for a predatory journal.
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence [Dec 11,2019] et al. #scicomm HT Predatory journals are a global threat.
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence via et al
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence
There are hundreds if not thousands of predatory journals in operation. To the public and media (and apparently to many scientists) these journals are indistinguishable from legitimate scientific journals-creating an alternate "scientific" reality .
I recommend bringing in as a collaborator.
Predatory journals are hiding under a cloak of confusion. Expert panels can't define predatory.