Predatory Publishing Definitions
The NSF STEPP team and the NSF are not affiliated with or responsible for content shared here. The opinions expressed in the links below reflect the site's author(s) or organizations and not the NSF STEPP team or the NSF itself.
Defining Predatory Publishing
Since the term “predatory publishing” came into the awareness of academics in the mid-2000s, the definition has evolved and fractured, with many different organizations and scholars attempting to define what it means for a journal or publisher to be “predatory.” The following definitions show a progression of definitions widely used in scholarly literature related to publishing ethics and predatory publishing, starting with the conceptualization popularized by librarian Jeffrey Beall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 - 2011: The term "predatory publishing" started circulating in academic circles.
Predatory publishers are "those that unprofessionally abuse the author-pays publishing model for their own profit."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2012: Beall's list of predatory publishers gains recognition and mainstream journals begin publishing articles addressing the topic.
Predatory publishers “publish counterfeit journals to exploit the open-access model in which the author pays. These predatory publishers are dishonest and lack transparency. They aim to dupe researchers, especially those inexperienced in scholarly communication. They set up websites that closely resemble those of legitimate online publishers, and publish journals of questionable and downright low quality. Many purport to be headquartered in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada or Australia but really hail from Pakistan, India or Nigeria.”
Beall, J. (2012). Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature, 489(179). 10.1038/489179a
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2017: Scholars in diverse academic fields began examining the issue of predatory publishing empirically, establishing more refined definitions, and honing in on the lack of peer review in many predatory publications.
Journals characterized as 'predatory' [are those] which actively solicit manuscripts and charge publication fees without providing robust peer review and editorial services.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2018: Predatory publishing moves from the margins of scholarly discussions to a more central position, with scholarly communications professionals tackling the topic in a number of blog posts, intended for both academics and a wider general audience.
Frequently, authors publishing in predatory journals do not receive the services or benefit from the attributes of the journal they are seeking and believe they have paid for. Such deceptions are a hallmark of predatory journals and commonly include promising (non-existent) peer review, fake impact factors, fake editors and even misleading journal names uncannily similar to well-known, legitimate journals.
Predatory publishers are "those OA publishers who clearly and deliberately trick researchers – essentially, by failing to provide the promised (or even a meaningful) service and/or deceiving them about the nature of that service, simply in order to extract money from them.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2019: Groups of diverse stakeholders, representing the global academic community begin to form task forces and organized discussions with the goal of collaboratively combatting the issue of predatory publishing.
Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices.
Predatory publishing generally refers to the systematic for-profit publication of purportedly scholarly content (in journals and articles, monographs, books, or conference proceedings) in a deceptive or fraudulent way and without any regard for quality assurance.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2020: As more stakeholders become aware of the issue of predatory publishing, the nuances and complexities of the issue become more salient.
There is no black and white definition of predatory publishing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
University Libraries Addressing Predatory Publishing
Increasingly, university libraries in Western countries are positioning themselves as valuable resources for assisting faculty and students in vetting publication outlets. To serve their audiences, many university library websites now host resource sections dedicated specifically to educating scholars on predatory publishing and assisting them to identify credible publishing sources. Additionally, many library websites have attempted to define predatory publishing for their audiences. The examples below represent a range of university descriptions of predatory publishers.
George Washington University
Iowa State University
Sam Houston State University
Texas Tech University
University of Arizona
University of Cambridge
The University of Texas at San Antonio
University Grants Commission (Indian Higher Education Governing Body)
“Some of the typical characteristics of predatory journals are:
- Guaranteed acceptance of manuscript upon submission
- No peer-review process
- Pay and publish, irrespective of quality of manuscript or relevance to journal scope
- No journal website and/or no clarity on aims and scope of the journal
- Use of misleading and inaccurate self-generated impact factors
- No editorial board
- Publication of obviously poor-quality content and/or content that is clearly outside the stated scope of the journal”
College of Media & Communication
-
Address
Texas Tech University, Box 43082, Lubbock, TX 79409 -
Phone
806.742.6500