IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v12y2018i4p1296-1311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why?

Author

Listed:
  • Demir, Selcuk Besir

Abstract

This sequential explanatory mixed-methods study investigated where predatory/fake journals (PFJs) are founded, which countries’ researchers publish more frequently in PFJs, the identity of the editors of PFJs, why researchers publish in PFJs, and what factors encourage such publications. A survey and semi-structured follow-up interviews were used to collect data. The results indicate that the majority of PFJs are located in developing countries; 119 journals provided incorrect postal addresses; the greatest number of researchers who published in PFJs are from India, Nigeria, and Turkey, suggesting that most of the publications in PFJs are submitted by researchers in developing countries; the interviewed Turkish researchers submitted their articles to PFJs in pursuit of rapid academic promotion; the incentive allowance system encourages researchers to publish in PFJs; and the well-known “publish-or-perish” pressure and unawareness are other potential factors that drive participants to submit their papers to PFJs.

Suggested Citation

  • Demir, Selcuk Besir, 2018. "Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1296-1311.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:4:p:1296-1311
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157718301962
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaare Aagaard & Carter Bloch & Jesper W. Schneider, 2015. "Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: The case of the Norwegian Publication Indicator," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 106-117.
    2. Selcuk Besir Demir, 2018. "Pros and cons of the new financial support policy for Turkish researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2053-2068, September.
    3. Jeffrey Beall, 2016. "Ban predators from the scientific record," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7607), pages 326-326, June.
    4. Jeffrey Beall, 2012. "Predatory publishers are corrupting open access," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 179-179, September.
    5. Declan Butler, 2013. "Investigating journals: The dark side of publishing," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7442), pages 433-435, March.
    6. Jingfeng Xia & Jennifer L. Harmon & Kevin G. Connolly & Ryan M. Donnelly & Mary R. Anderson & Heather A. Howard, 2015. "Who publishes in “predatory” journals?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(7), pages 1406-1417, July.
    7. Barbara Good & Niki Vermeulen & Brigitte Tiefenthaler & Erik Arnold, 2015. "Counting quality? The Czech performance-based research funding system," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 91-105.
    8. Marcin Kozak & Olesia Iefremova & James Hartley, 2016. "Spamming in scholarly publishing: A case study," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(8), pages 2009-2015, August.
    9. Piotr Sorokowski & Emanuel Kulczycki & Agnieszka Sorokowska & Katarzyna Pisanski, 2017. "Predatory journals recruit fake editor," Nature, Nature, vol. 543(7646), pages 481-483, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bagues, Manuel & Sylos-Labini, Mauro & Zinovyeva, Natalia, 2019. "A walk on the wild side: ‘Predatory’ journals and information asymmetries in scientific evaluations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 462-477.
    2. Tove Faber Frandsen, 2017. "Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1513-1528, December.
    3. You, Taekho & Park, Jinseo & Lee, June Young & Yun, Jinhyuk & Jung, Woo-Sung, 2022. "Disturbance of questionable publishing to academia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    4. Sven Helmer & David B. Blumenthal & Kathrin Paschen, 2020. "What is meaningful research and how should we measure it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 153-169, October.
    5. Frederick H. Wallace & Timothy J. Perri, 2018. "Economists behaving badly: publications in predatory journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 749-766, May.
    6. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    7. Kulczycki, Emanuel & Korzeń, Marcin & Korytkowski, Przemysław, 2017. "Toward an excellence-based research funding system: Evidence from Poland," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 282-298.
    8. Hladchenko, Myroslava & Moed, Henk F., 2021. "The effect of publication traditions and requirements in research assessment and funding policies upon the use of national journals in 28 post-socialist countries," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    9. Renata Kudaibergenova & Sandugash Uzakbay & Asselya Makanova & Kymbat Ramadinkyzy & Erlan Kistaubayev & Ruslan Dussekeev & Kadyrzhan Smagulov, 2022. "Managing publication change at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 453-479, January.
    10. Gabriel-Alexandru Vîiu & Mihai Păunescu, 2021. "The citation impact of articles from which authors gained monetary rewards based on journal metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4941-4974, June.
    11. Anna Abalkina, 2024. "Challenges posed by hijacked journals in Scopus," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(4), pages 395-422, April.
    12. Seeber, Marco & Cattaneo, Mattia & Meoli, Michele & Malighetti, Paolo, 2019. "Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 478-491.
    13. Lukasz Prorokowski, 2021. "Predatory conferences in economics and finance," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 52(1), pages 77-96.
    14. Marcelo S. Perlin & Takeyoshi Imasato & Denis Borenstein, 2018. "Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 255-273, July.
    15. Yaşar Tonta & Müge Akbulut, 2020. "Does monetary support increase citation impact of scholarly papers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1617-1641, November.
    16. Selcuk Besir Demir, 2018. "Pros and cons of the new financial support policy for Turkish researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2053-2068, September.
    17. Bo-Christer Björk & Sari Kanto-Karvonen & J. Tuomas Harviainen, 2020. "How Frequently Are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, March.
    18. Emanuel Kulczycki & Marek Hołowiecki & Zehra Taşkın & Franciszek Krawczyk, 2021. "Citation patterns between impact-factor and questionable journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8541-8560, October.
    19. Vîiu, Gabriel-Alexandru, 2016. "A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 552-566.
    20. Stephan Puehringer & Johanna Rath & Teresa Griesebner, 2021. "The political economy of academic publishing: On the commodification of a public good," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:4:p:1296-1311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.