Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences

Open-access is a model for publishing scholarly, peer-reviewed journals on the Internet that relies on sources of funding other than subscription fees. Some publishers and editors have exploited the author-pays model of open-access, publishing for their own profit. Submissions are encouraged through widely distributed e-mails on behalf of a growing number of journals that may accept many or all submissions and subject them to little, if any, peer review or editorial oversight. Bogus conference invitations are distributed in a similar fashion. The results of these less than ethical practices might include loss of faculty member time and money, inappropriate article inclusions in curriculum vitae, and costs to the college or funding source.

[1]  David Green,et al.  An Open Access Overview , 2012 .

[2]  Claudio Gandelli,et al.  Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure , 2012, J. Informetrics.

[3]  Natasha Gilbert,et al.  Editor will quit over hoax paper , 2009 .

[4]  Richard Van Noorden Open access: The true cost of science publishing , 2013, Nature.

[5]  Peter Suber Open Access Overview , 2012 .

[6]  M. Lauer,et al.  Percentile Ranking and Citation Impact of a Large Cohort of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute–Funded Cardiovascular R01 Grants , 2014, Circulation research.

[7]  David W Grainger,et al.  Peer review as professional responsibility: a quality control system only as good as the participants. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[8]  Jeffrey Beall,et al.  Predatory publishers are corrupting open access , 2012, Nature.

[9]  Christopher R. France,et al.  Reviewing Manuscripts for Peer-Review Journals: A Primer for Novice and Seasoned Reviewers , 2011, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[10]  Peer‐Reviewed Publication: A View from Inside , 2004, Epilepsia.

[11]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: a Publisher's Perspective , 2006, International journal of clinical practice. Supplement.

[12]  Nicolás Robinson-García,et al.  The Google scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  S. Sabharwal,et al.  Open access publishing: a study of current practices in orthopaedic research , 2014, International Orthopaedics.

[14]  David C. Prosser Between a rock and a hard place: the big squeeze for small publishers , 2004, Learn. Publ..

[15]  Jason Roberts,et al.  An Author's Guide to Publication Ethics: A Review of Emerging Standards in Biomedical Journals , 2009, Headache.

[16]  G Bordage,et al.  Reasons Reviewers Reject and Accept Manuscripts: The Strengths and Weaknesses in Medical Education Reports , 2001, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[17]  Charlotte Haug,et al.  The downside of open-access publishing. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  J F Waeckerle,et al.  Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance. , 1998, Annals of emergency medicine.

[19]  B. Björk,et al.  The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 , 2011, PloS one.

[20]  B. Björk,et al.  Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact , 2012, BMC Medicine.

[21]  Devi Lal,et al.  The Rise of Open Access , 2011, Indian Journal of Microbiology.

[22]  Jeffrey Beall,et al.  Five Scholarly Open Access Publishers , 2012 .

[23]  J. Bohannon Who's afraid of peer review? , 2013, Science.

[24]  Richard Van Noorden Brazilian citation scheme outed , 2013, Nature.

[25]  Elizabeth C. Whipple,et al.  The Changing Landscape of Scholarly Publishing: Will Radiation Research Survive? , 2013, Radiation research.