Scholarly Open Access

97 Responses to Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013

1. kathleen Gust says:

   December 6, 2012 at 10:33 AM

   Thanks Jeff, I get asked about some of these publishers more than I’d like, but the profs and students they are targeting are grateful to know there are librarians keeping an eye on them, even if the industry can’t seem to police it. Your list is a super resource.

   Reply
2. Nils says:

   December 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM

   Thanks indeed. This list is going to be very useful to me as a member of hiring committees, especially since the predators have started to imitate the names of serious journals.

   Reply
3. Tevni says:

   December 6, 2012 at 4:51 PM

   What are the criteria to determine what journal is predator? If an academic group of people want to create a Scholar Journal are they free to do it? Do they need to request some authorization from some publisher association? If so, which one?

   Reply
   • Jeffrey Beall says:

     December 6, 2012 at 4:59 PM

     The criteria are linked to here on this post.

     To start a new journal, you do not need to get permission from anyone (at least here in the west). Everyone should be free to start a scholarly journal. We just hope that those who do start jorunals follow the highest possible ethical publication standards.

     Reply
     • Tevni says:

       December 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM

       How you assess that these journals in your list are not following “acceptable” ethical publications standards?
     • Jeffrey Beall says:

       December 7, 2012 at 9:24 AM

       Please see my criteria here: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteria-for-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-2nd-edition/
     • Tevni says:

       December 7, 2012 at 9:47 AM

       Did you alone read and evaluate each one of these 370 journals? Is this an individual stand alone work? How reliable it is? I value such kind of effort, however I have some concerns with one person value judgment in public matters.
     • Jeffrey Beall says:

       December 7, 2012 at 9:56 AM

       There are two lists — one of publishers and one of independent journals. Neither numbers 370. But yes, I personally have closely srcutinized and analyzed each and every publisher or independent journal on the list.

       If you “have some concerns with one person value judgement in public matters” then you probably want to close down every newspaper and every magazine in the world. Good luck.
4. Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 | QUT Business Librarians' Blog says:

   December 6, 2012 at 7:42 PM

   [...] http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/ [...]

   Reply
5. Editores depredadores | PoliScience says:

   December 7, 2012 at 1:26 AM

   [...] Beall habla en estos casos de Editores depredadores y ofrece en su blog Scholarly Open Access un listado, realizado de manera colaborativa, de los editores y revistas Open Access ha [...]

   Reply
6. Faraz Ahmed says:

   December 7, 2012 at 2:36 AM

   I do not believe totally on your list. There are some 370 journal, which you verified and inquired. Strange!!! I checked some of them, they are doing good providing good research without subscription charges and they are open access. Is your post more to stop open access and help publishers who charge hefty amount even to read the research?

   Reply
   • Jeffrey Beall says:

     December 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM

     Perhaps we have different definitions of “good research.”

     Reply
     • Ahmad says:

       December 17, 2012 at 3:22 PM

       what about INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOASSAYS?
     • Jeffrey Beall says:

       December 18, 2012 at 4:25 PM

       The publisher of this journal, ebiosciences, has been added to my list. Thaks.
7. Zerdana says:

   December 7, 2012 at 8:31 AM

   Jeff, it would be even more helpful if you can append a link to an article you have written about these publishers/journals next to their names and URLs, so the readers get some more context. Thanks for the great work!

   Reply
8. Predatory Open Access Publishers | Open Access @ CUNY says:

   December 7, 2012 at 9:19 AM

   [...] 2013 list of predatory open access publishers and journals has been released. This year’s list includes over 200 predatory open access publishing [...]

   Reply
9. Predatory Open Acecess Publishers are on The Hunt « Florida Biotechnology News says:

   December 7, 2012 at 10:00 AM

   [...] Each year, Jeffrey Beall, an academic librarian at the University of Colorado Denver, publishes a list of allegedly scientific journal publishers who really just want your submission [...]

   Reply
10. Rory McGreal says:

    December 8, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    The problem is with the “gold” open access model itself. It is an encouragement for them to profit from faculty who are not being careful about where they publish. This is a faulty revenue model in any case. Why would institutions 1. Donate works for free; 2 Then pay for the privilege of so doing. 3. Then 3 Pay again to purchase rights to the database.
    This model is worse than the present donate and buy back model. At least you don’t pay twice.
    Rory

    Reply
    • Nils says:

      December 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM

      In addition, a gold OA publisher’s revenue is proportional to the number of papers he accepts. So there is no incentive to maintain a serious peer review process.
      Of course, in the long run this will have a negative effect on the journal’s reputation. But it is so easy to start a whole bunch of new ones…

      Reply
      • Robin Hood says:

        December 9, 2012 at 6:43 AM

        Every single one of my blog posts has been deleted because I state the truth and because I have a fundamental insight that has not led to a profound improvement of Mr. Beall’s blog. I hope that this one comment will be left in peace. The problem is not with the gold OA model or the whatever colour model. It is with who implements it. And, to think that the publishers are serving the maximum profit in this scheme is extremely naive. Please start to question the main-stream publishers, the ministries of education and who serves on them. Finally, if we look at Italy and Greece, please examine the banking sector and the government positions in the EU, and please start to draw parallels to the corporatism taking place in science and science publishing. The astute will be able to link the dots. Its those who are unable to link the dots that worries me the most… if we have enough people linking the dots, then the solution to OA fraud can be found. One clue to the way forward: No. 148 on Beall’s list 1. Medical Science Journals. We need boycotts followed by total closure. I personally hope to see “Dead link” on at least half the list by next year.
11. Update: Diigo in Education group (weekly) | ChalkTech says:

    December 8, 2012 at 5:51 PM

    [...] Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 « Scholarly Open Access [...]

    Reply
12. Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 | Open Access | Universität Stuttgart says:

    December 10, 2012 at 8:13 AM

    [...] hilfreich. Um schwarze Schafe, also die unseriösen Open-Access-Verlage, zu identifizieren, ist Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 ein geeignetes [...]

    Reply
13. Infobib » Aktualisierte Liste der “predatory open access publishers” says:

    December 11, 2012 at 5:18 AM

    [...] List” hatten wir hier vor einiger Zeit schon einmal. Die Liste wurde nun aktualisiert und vor einigen Tagen wurden auch die Kriterien veröffentlicht, die zu einer Aufnahme [...]

    Reply
14. AISR News & What’s New on JEFFLINE » Blog Archive » Predatory Publishers: Another Year-End List Worth Noting says:

    December 11, 2012 at 6:30 AM

    [...] approach is to consider where you should not publish by consulting Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers for 2013. The number of nefarious publishers has exploded over the past year, rising from 23 in the previous [...]

    Reply
    • Terri Boake says:

      December 26, 2012 at 4:18 PM

      I have this week alone received separate emails for at least 4 of this organization’s journals. When one online journal includes 19 separate topics, it is no wonder that the number has escalated! Most of the journals mentioned below have no issues out and any that have an issue, seem to be very “thin”.

      CALL FOR PAPER

      Dear author,

      I hope this email reaches you fine.

      We are looking forward to your submission. Here is the information of this journal.

      Publication:

      International Journal of Engineering Practical Research (IJEPR)

      About the journal:

      International Journal of Engineering Practical Research (IJEPR) is an internationally refereed journal dedicated to publishing the latest advancements in engineering research. The goal of this journal is to record the latest findings and promote further research in these areas. Scholars from all relevant academic fields are invited to submit high-quality manuscripts that describe the latest, state-of-the-art research results or innovations.

      Language:

      English

      Publisher:

      Science and Engineering Publishing Company, USA

      E-MAIL:

      ijepr@seipub.org

      Website:

      http://www.seipub.org/ijepr/

      Submission:

      Your paper will be published with no charge if it is accepted.

      Submission deadline: 2013-01-11

      Submit papers: http://www.seipub.org/ijepr/OnlineSubmission.aspx

      Prepare your paper

      Authors are invited to submit full papers, in English;

      All submissions will be peer-reviewed based on originality, technical quality and presentation. Your submission must not have been and will not be published elsewhere.

      Aims and Scope:

      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Aerospace Engineering
      • Agriculture Engineering
      • Biological Engineering Application
      • Civil Engineering
      • Computer Science Application
      • Chemical Engineering
      • Energy and Power Engineering
      • Electronic and Communication Engineering

      • Engineering Enterprise Education
      • Engineering Technology Education
      • Engineering Training
      • Experimental Teaching Reform
      • Engineering and Technology Science
      • Information Engineering
      • Material Engineering
      • Mechanical Engineering
      • Power and Electrical Engineering

      • Environmental Engineering

      Reply
15. Sergio Tomás Saravia says:

    December 13, 2012 at 10:39 AM

    Thank you very much! Excelent!

    Reply
16. Integritas akademik dan publikasi internasional « Melakukan Publikasi Internasional says:

    December 16, 2012 at 10:21 PM

    [...] or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers’. Yang tertarik sila, lirik daftarnya di sini. Daftar ini memuat 244 penerbit ‘predator’ dengan puluhan judul jurnal per penernit dan [...]

    Reply
17. Per sopravvissuti al calendario » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it says:

    December 21, 2012 at 12:26 PM

    [...] degli editori scientifici che pubblicano qualunque bufala, basta pagare. In un anno sono passati da 23 a 243 per via del boom e della sua [...]

    Reply
18. Peter Nonacs says:

    December 21, 2012 at 11:36 PM

    I have a specific comment/question about Ashdin Publishing on the predatory list. Recently we published an article in their Journal of Evolutionary Medicine. The editorial board has real people, who are actually well known in the field. Our paper was rigorously reviewed. And the charges were $300 – which is much more reasonable than the supposedly non-predatory PLoS group. In short our experience was in every way comparable or better than many an established journal. Now Ashdin has multiple new journals and I certainly cannot vouch for all. But is it possible that a publisher can put out both predatory and reputable journals at the same time? And if a publisher ever makes your list, what can they do, or what info has to come in to get off of it?

    Reply
19. Prof.R.Sivakumar says:

    December 23, 2012 at 9:16 AM

    It is a good list but why the journals in USA and developed countries are not analysed and listed, is it because they may sue the author immediately. Also the journal Hindawi was added some time back, suddenly removed, is it because of any personal reason? Why only journals from developing countries are being targeted and also only open access journals? Is it because the author is lobbying for the non open access journals ? How far this list is reliable is seriously questionable. I appreciate its a good work which is needed but the list is completely biased which is proved beyond doubt

    Reply
20. Leanne says:

    December 24, 2012 at 5:11 PM

    Completely agree with “Scientific and American Publishing” (one of their journals was “American Journal of Tourism Management” ) I found a completely plagarized study with fabricated data in it during my own dissertation research. I emailed “SAP” about their included a false study (and sent them the original article). No reply, surprise!

    Reply
    • Robin Hood says:

      January 7, 2013 at 9:29 AM

      Leanne, some friendly advice. Publish your story so that it serves as a historical document for posterity and also to warn others to take care. The only way to advance our cause against fraud is through publishing. So, make your case, present all the evidence, and publish it. Once published, it will be a historical document forever that no-one can ever deny. This is my new approach in 2013 since who of us has money and resources to take these crooks to court? Moreover, how do we take a fraud to court that sits 10,000 km away? The only way is by publically and formally exposing their fraud through a more formal medium than a blog, for posterity. Hope to see your story in OA soon.

      Reply
      • pravate tuitemwong says:

        February 6, 2013 at 2:49 AM

        I agree with this comment! I myself tried to take action on “Archive des Science Journal” that appears to be a fraud. It claims the Impact Factor of 0.3 or so on the webpage. I even wrote to Thompson Reuter where they claim they got the IF from but I got no answer.
21. Publisher wants $650 to retract duplicated study « Retraction Watch says:

    December 26, 2012 at 7:48 AM

    [...] of Colorado librarian Jeffrey Beall — who produces a frequently updated list of predatory publishers — first wrote about the case on his blog last week. Beall alerted a journal about a [...]

    Reply
22. Predatory Journals « rameshkmishra says:

    December 26, 2012 at 8:10 AM

    [...] tricks are a recent phenomena in the world of publishing. This website lists  hundreds of them http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/. What is this all about? Looks like everyone wants to publish some crap somehow. Now, there must be [...]

    Reply
23. Improbable Research » Blog Archive » Twisty Tape in a Tube, in Confab says:

    December 26, 2012 at 8:20 AM

    [...] Thanks to Retraction Watch for alerting us to the existence of CONFAB, the journal’s publisher, and for the further knowledge that CONFAB is included in Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013. [...]

    Reply
24. Predatory « Ripe-tomato.org says:

    December 27, 2012 at 2:10 PM

    [...] called Jeffrey Beale (click here), has been keeping tabs on these Predatory Publishers (click here).  He’s found 243, many with a hundred or more titles on their lists, as well as another 126 [...]

    Reply
25. mbmahiques says:

    January 1, 2013 at 8:40 PM

    I´m not sure if you´ve missed this one
    ¨IJMSEA is a referred journal: reviewed, indexed and cited by : “Zentralblatt Für Mathematik” (Germany), “Mathematical Reviews” (USA), Maths Sci. net, Google and Google Scholar, EBSECO Publishing, USA, & Open Directory J., Russia, Open J-Gate (Ele. Jou.), ULRICH’s Periodically Directory, Universe Digital Library etc.

    The consolidated impact factor registered by International Journal of Mathematical Sciences & Engineering Applications (IJMSEA) for 2011 is 0.1752.¨

    Thank you for a great post, and be aware!

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      January 2, 2013 at 12:59 PM

      That journal appears to belong to the publisher Ascent International Journals. This publisher’s journals are toll-access. I only include OA journals on my lists. Still, I recommend that authors avoid all the journals published by Ascent. They create and boast fake impact factors for their journals.

      Reply
26. rleonhard says:

    January 3, 2013 at 1:48 PM

    I searched for some of these journals on Google Scholar and found them. Assuming that all of these journals come up in Google Scholar searches, how do you address this issue with students (and other teachers/professors) intent on using Google Scholar to do research? I typically tell them to stay away and/or be wary along with other approaches, but I know they still use it anyway. I’m interested in hearing how others deal with this issue. Thank you for your input.

    Reply
    • Robin Hood says:

      January 7, 2013 at 9:38 AM

      Leonard, I have an idea. Why don’t YOU take care of being responsible for contacting Google and aksing them about their responsibilities towards academic quality. That would serve the community of academics and scientists best. Then, when you have something productive to say, please come back to the blog and share your moral victories with us. If each of us plays our part and each of us tackles the fraudsters and those who support the fraudsters, then maybe something effective can be achieved. If you assume that Jeff, who I assume does not wear a large red, blue and yellow “S” on his shirt, is responsible for taking care of all of these things, I am afraid he might go bald quickly.I am not suggesting that Google is supporting fraud, but if they are allowing plagiarised texts, and fraudulently produced pseudo-academic papers to be published, then surely we should hold Google accountable for supporting fraud (to a limited degree). The same principle would apply to editors-in-chief, editors and authors who support or publish or pay such predatory publishers. The bottom line: we should all play our part in fighting the crime, using Jeff’s blog as the launch pad. Wouldn’t you say that this ia a fair and logical way of trying to deal with the problem, especially accross transnational borders?

      Reply
      • rleonhard says:

        January 7, 2013 at 2:33 PM

        Robin Hood, you’ve completely misunderstood my comment and question. I was asking the author Beall (and anyone else who cared to respond politely) how he dealt with this issue as a librarian with students doing research using Google Scholar. Are librarians comfortable with students using Google Scholar knowing that these publications are frequent results in searches? Do they inform their students about the possible fraudulent articles and journals and the risks of using Google Scholar? And what are their tactics in addressing this specific topic with students? I was not asking anyone to do work for me or to take on Google. In my experience as a librarian, these issues and topics are frequently discussed and shared among colleagues.
27. Open Access and pseudo-science journals « Science Intelligence and InfoPros says:

    January 6, 2013 at 5:00 AM

    [...] This list is available on: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/ [...]

    Reply
28. Ymir says:

    January 8, 2013 at 4:22 AM

    This is a helpful list, thanks for putting it together. Consider changing the links to use “no follow” (see http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=96569) so that you’re not promoting the PageRank of these journals as more people begin linking to your blog.

    Reply
29. Open Access Is Not Necessarily Good › Hybrid Publishing Lab says:

    January 10, 2013 at 2:21 PM

    [...] last year Jeffrey Beal published an update to his list of Predatory Open Access Publishers. The list grew from 23 questionable publishers in 2011 to 225 in 2012.  With his list Beal reminds [...]

    Reply
30. George says:

    January 12, 2013 at 11:46 AM

    I’m really concerned to see that Hindawi is not included this year after being under investigation this year. In Hindawi is clear that you pay to get something published. There are no anonymous reviewers. What else is needed to define them a predatory publisher?

    Reply
    • Peter Nonacs says:

      January 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM

      I did publish this year in a Hindawi journal. It was anonymously reviewed and and our experience was professional. The journal is Psyche, which has had a long history of being published by the Cambridge Entomological Society. Apparently the rights to this journal were bought/transferred to Hindawi. Again, this raises the problem of apparently legitimate journals having a publisher that may or may not be partially predatory.

      Reply
31. Laureano Ralon says:

    January 15, 2013 at 8:49 PM

    Reblogged this on Figure/Ground Communication™.

    Reply
32. Hilary Carey says:

    January 15, 2013 at 8:49 PM

    What about this kind of approach? I do not need to pay publishers to accept my work and I wonder why I am being pressured (I was approached multiple times with the same request) to publish in this journal which does not appear in Australia’s list of approved journals. It does not sound like a scam – just an imposition. And they ask for money.

    Hilary Carey

    [Dear X]

    We contacted you on 22 November 2012, regarding a Special Issue on
    “Expanding the Study of Religion and Missions”to be published in
    Religions (ISSN 2077-1444, http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions).

    On behalf of the Guest Editor, Dr. Jennifer Graber, we would
    like to renew our invitation for you to contribute a full research
    paper or an outstanding long review for peer-review and
    possible publication in the following Special Issue:

    Special Issue: Expanding the Study of Religion and Missions
    Website: http://www.mdpi.com/si/religions/religion_mission/
    Guest Editor: Dr. Jennifer Graber
    Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 May 2013

    If you decide to contribute, please let us know, and send us your
    manuscript now or up until the deadline. Submitted papers should
    not have been published previously, nor be under consideration
    for publication elsewhere. We also encourage authors to send us
    their tentative title and short abstract by e-mail for approval to the
    Editorial Office at: religions@mdpi.com.
    In case you cannot meet the deadline, please feel free to contact us.

    This Special Issue will be fully open access. Open access (unlimited
    and free access by readers) increases publicity and promotes more
    frequent citations as indicated by several studies. Open access is
    supported by the authors and their institutes.
    More information is available at http://www.mdpi.com/about/openaccess/.

    The Article Processing Charges (APC) are 300 CHF for well
    prepared manuscripts. In addition, a fee of 250 CHF may apply
    if English editing or extensive revisions must be undertaken by the
    Editorial Office.
    More information can be found at http://www.mdpi.com/about/apc/.

    Please visit the website of Instructions for Authors before submitting
    a paper at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions/instructions/.
    Manuscripts should be submitted through the online manuscript submission
    and editorial system at http://www.mdpi.com/user/manuscripts/upload/.

    Religions (ISSN 2077-1444) is an international, open access
    scholarly journal publishing peer-reviewed studies of religious
    thought and practice. It is available online to promote critical,
    hermeneutical, historical, and constructive conversations. It aims
    to serve the interests of a wide range of thoughtful readers and
    academic scholars of religion, as well as theologians, philosophers,
    social scientists, anthropologists, psychologists, neuroscientists
    and others interested in the multidisciplinary study of religions.

    MDPI publishes several peer-reviewed, open access journals listed at
    http://www.mdpi.com/. The Editorial Board members, including several
    Nobel Laureates (http://www.mdpi.com/about/nobelists/), are all leading
    active scholars. All MDPI journals maintain rapid, yet rigorous, peer-
    review, manuscript handling and editorial processes. MDPI journals have
    increased their impact factors, see “2011 Newly Released Impact
    Factors”, http://www.mdpi.com/about/announcements/235/.

    In case of questions, please contact the Editorial Office at:
    religions@mdpi.com

    We are looking forward to hearing from you.

    Kind regards,
    Wanda Gruetter

    On behalf of the Guest Editor

    Dr. Jennifer Graber
    The University of Texas at Austin
    Department of Religious Studies
    Burdine 406 – Mail Code A3700
    Austin
    Texas 78712
    USA
    Website: http://www.jennifergraber.net
    E-Mail: jgraber@austin.utexas.edu

    –
    Wanda Gruetter
    MDPI AG
    Kandererstrasse 25
    CH-4057 Basel, Switzerland
    Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
    Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
    E-Mail: gruetter@mdpi.com
    http://www.mdpi.com/

    Reply
    • J Bottle says:

      January 20, 2013 at 9:53 PM

      OA publishers ask for money, but the redatory publishers work for money. A real publisher has their standard of publication, and money is not the reason to accept a paper.

      Reply
33. Dan Ellender says:

    February 1, 2013 at 7:49 AM

    Jeff, it sounds like your list opens up an area that needs much more investigation. Obviously the world of scientific publishing is opening up. It seems as if Open Access is in need of some sort of ‘seal of approval’ for organizations, especially if Nobel Laureates are being pulled into the system.

    Open Access is a Pandora’s Box that isn’t going away. How academics respond to it and change it is critical.

    Reply
34. Open Access a threat to academic freedom? | Download Mp3 for Free says:

    February 10, 2013 at 11:30 AM

    [...] outfits that by now easily outnumber the decent OA publishers, and there is no end in sight.  Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers flags the magnitude of the problem at hand. Budding academics and those not quite competitive [...]

    Reply
35. Predatory Open Access Archaeology Journals or just poor quality? PAGEPRESS Publishers « Doug's Archaeology says:

    February 11, 2013 at 4:14 AM

    [...] We would like to point out that PAGEPress was listed in the “watch list” (meaning not listed as a sure Predatory publisher as Bell says “we do not consider the following publishers to be predatory, open-access publishers, but they may show some characteristics of them, and we are closely monitoring them”) in 2012. Currently (2013), we are not present in that list any longer. Please see at: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/#more-1036 [...]

    Reply
36. From: Ms B. W. Standingagainsta-Wall | Pen, Book, Sword. says:

    February 11, 2013 at 12:01 PM

    [...] have not replied to Ms Russell, yet. I have forwarded this little research to Beall’s predatory journal database for his interest and amusement. I’ll wait until he documents this particular case of [...]

    Reply
37. RNL Bio and the Administration of an Unlicensed Stem Cell-based Medical Product to a Child With Cerebral Palsy | Health in the Global Village says:

    February 12, 2013 at 9:40 AM

    [...] critic of poor-quality and unreasonably expensive open access journals, under the category, “Predatory Publishers.” Rather than appearing in an “internationally renowned journal,” this case report was [...]

    Reply
38. Predatory #OpenAccess publishers: what’s the worst which can happen? | Marc Robinson-Rechavi says:

    February 13, 2013 at 5:38 AM

    [...] theme in discussions about open access is the problem of predatory publishers, illustrated by Beall’s list. Now I agree that it is unnice that these exist (although the threshold for inclusion in the list [...]

    Reply
39. Another Publisher Has Serious Problems With Blog Posts Written by a Librarian | LJ INFOdocket says:

    February 15, 2013 at 6:54 AM

    [...] a Direct Link to the December 12, 2012 Blog Post That the Publisher Doesn’t Like: “Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013″ If needed, the post is also available via Google cache and Yandex [...]

    Reply
40. Philip Machanick says:

    February 25, 2013 at 2:27 AM

    The flipside of this is that there are some quite respectable journals published with predatory charges for access that put them out of reach of the less well funded researcher or library. Publishing in that kind of journal limits your ability to be seen, read and cited.

    In my view all research should be free to read. If a journal needs to charge authors to cover costs, that is acceptable as long as there is an option for authors without funding to cover publication charges not to pay, and the decision to accept a paper is independent of ability to pay.

    In some cases, the dividing line between scam and acceptable is not so clear. I’ve seen giant multi-conferences that look like scams including the sort of conference that would accept any random (literally) paper, but if you check all the individual conferences, you may find others are respectable, with real academics doing the review and programme chair. I haven’t yet seen this with one of these dubious journal publishers but it is plausible that they could have made the con real by picking up a decent editorial board in an obscure area that is short of journals. Not so likely in an area already well covered.

    In either case the key thing before participating in any way is do your due diligence on credibility (editors, previous issues, citations).

    Reply
41. The Downside of Open-Access Publishing «African Studies library African Studies library says:

    February 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM

    [...] refers to: Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Jeffrey Beall. Scholarly Open Access blog entry released December 4, [...]

    Reply
42. Tom says:

    March 1, 2013 at 8:05 PM

    Jeff, thanks. I browsed through OMICS cardiology journal and found an astonishing number of well-respected people on the ed board, as well as a few articles by established groups. My take is they were either naive or that is where they started sending some of their crap data, while the youngsters can enjoy the “glamour” of being on a board which they would not have done in serious journals.
    My question is, have you been able to scrutinize the peer-review process in depth, i.e. hard facts and figures relating to acceptance rates, processing times etc. This would underbuild your and my assumption of negligible peer-review. Thanks.

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      March 2, 2013 at 8:47 AM

      It’s difficult to fully observe their peer-review process because they are not transparent or they do not honestly describe it. I do know that they send out personalized spam emails to researchers, praising an earlier paper and inviting them to submit another. They do not mention the article processing fee. Then the accept and publish the paper and send the author an invoice.

      Reply
      • Tom says:

        March 2, 2013 at 5:39 PM

        Thanks Jeff. I am aware of that and daily receive many spam invitations to submit or attend meetings. One way of evaluation could be to go after the authors, directly asking for info on processing times, how they would grade the review process, have them evaluate it in a simplified way, and ask around the fees (if they expected fees and when these occured). also, how many times (if any) their study had been rejected elsewhere before (in non-OA or OA journals) and if authors would send their best work to the same journal. you could make this into a one page standard form. you would need to find a way not to scare off authors in order to get a decent response rate. you can even turn this into a proper study, ie randomized selection of OA J, articles etc. then revisit the field in NATURE comments…
    • brebisfatale says:

      March 7, 2013 at 10:44 PM

      I have just received an invitation to review an article submitted to ‘Global Journal of Political Science and Int. Relation’ from the publisher ‘Global Research Journals’. As this field is nowhere near my own research experience (mainly ecology) I believe that my email address had been collected via spambot. I don’t believe the authors of the paper will be happy to know that their article is being sent to random strangers with a less-than-vague idea of Political Science.

      Reply
      • Jeffrey Beall says:

        March 8, 2013 at 10:41 AM

        Yes, sending articles for review to scholars in non-matching fields is a hallmark of predatory publishers.
43. Felipe G. Nievinski says:

    March 2, 2013 at 8:15 PM

    Great, much needed work — kudos to Jeffrey Beall! I’d be interested in hearing your opinion about MOAMJ — multidisciplinary open access mega journals. Although often published by well-established organizations, it does seem predatory IMHO. The very broad coverage implies it works like a vanity press, as you’ve pointed out in the past. And at $1000+ author fees per article, it’s a money cow!!!

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      March 3, 2013 at 1:33 PM

      Thanks, Felipe! That’s the first time I have heard this new term.

      Reply
      • Felipe G. Nievinski says:

        March 3, 2013 at 3:28 PM

        Also worth highlighting is that MOAMJ are not limited in terms of number of pages per issue, or even number of issues per year.
44. African Studies library African Studies library says:

    March 6, 2013 at 2:20 PM

    [...] worthwhile picking a publisher very carefully! Take a look at Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 (December 4, [...]

    Reply
45. Predatory publishing «African Studies library African Studies library says:

    March 6, 2013 at 2:32 PM

    [...] worthwhile picking a publisher very carefully! Take a look at Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 (December 4, [...]

    Reply
46. ฺเมื่อจะตีพิมพ์จงระวัง Bogus Journals | Thai Grads says:

    March 7, 2013 at 10:25 PM

    [...] http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/ [...]

    Reply
47. An Inadvertent Revolutionary? Developing Law, Crime and History as an Open Access Journal | History Workshop says:

    March 15, 2013 at 4:11 AM

    [...] have seen other online journals come and go, and we have also seen an increase in so-called ‘predatory journals’ that are not created and developed by academics for academics, but by questionable private [...]

    Reply
48. Predatory Journal yang (Cukup) Meresahkan | Moko Apt says:

    March 20, 2013 at 9:41 AM

    [...] di nomor kesekian ratus yang di blacklist “meragukan” (full list klik ini, list update tahun 2013 di sini). Ya sudah, langsung saya delete file tersebut dari komputer [...]

    Reply
49. Musa says:

    March 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM

    How about European-American Journals. It is not on Beall list but I have my doubts regarding its integrity.

    Reply
50. David Gurarie says:

    March 28, 2013 at 3:33 PM

    Jeff,
    thanks for your important public service. Profit driven business has the power to corrupt, and scientific publishing is no exception. Your list should be a wake up call to bring order and establish academic/scientific standards of acceptance into this “free for all” market frenzie.

    Reply
51. David Gurarie says:

    March 28, 2013 at 4:02 PM

    I found “Frontiers in Aerospace Engineering” in the Jeff’s journal list.
    Not long ago I was contacted by another “Frontiers” publication
    http://www.frontiersin.org/about
    Do they all belong to the predatory list ?

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      March 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM

      No. The one you saw, Frontiers in Aerospace Engineering, is published by Science and Engineering Publishing Company, not by the publisher called Frontiers. All of Science and Engineering Publishing Company’s journals are on my list, however. Their use of the term “Frontiers” may be an attempt to borrow from the prestige of the legitimate publisher.

      Reply
52. Il pesce risorto – Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it says:

    April 2, 2013 at 8:00 AM

    [...] e folta compagnia bella uscito nientepopodimeno che sul `Chemistry and Materials Research´ dell’`International Institute for Science, Technology & Education´ (editore predone n. 116, [...]

    Reply
53. C’è posta per te, Alessio – Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it says:

    April 8, 2013 at 1:58 PM

    [...] Conferences organizzate dalle istituzioni firmatarie, le quali si impegnano, non a finanziare predatory publishers, bensì [...]

    Reply
54. La fusione fredda targata ISCMNS-Unesco, parte III « Oggi Scienza says:

    April 12, 2013 at 12:45 AM

    [...] Kresenn dott. Celani et al. tra cui il dott. Ovidi - spiegò il pagamento dell’articolo a un corruttore dell’open access con l’adesione degli autori a quanto raccomandato dall’Unesco onde [...]

    Reply
55. DotBlot says:

    April 19, 2013 at 3:34 AM

    Can anyone comment on this:

    ScopeMed.org
    http://www.scopemed.org/index.php

    “ScopeMed is an Online Journal/Article Management system that can enable all of the operations of the editorial functions of a journal.”

    Add your journal:
    http://www.ejmanager.com/?page=journalsubmit

    Reply
56. Un estudio vergonzoso sobre la radiación de Fukushima | Naukas says:

    April 20, 2013 at 2:06 AM

    [...] seriamente cuestionadas. La revista pertenece al grupo Scientific Research Publishing (SCIRP), acusado de unas prácticas que se han venido a conocer como editores [...]

    Reply
57. Yoanda Alim Syahbana says:

    April 21, 2013 at 5:43 PM

    Reblogged this on I solemnly swear that i am up to no good ….

    Reply
58. Nora says:

    April 25, 2013 at 7:25 AM

    What about journals that invited you as a guest editor and you have to do everything? just for the honor…

    Reply
59. Field Notes says:

    April 28, 2013 at 7:36 PM

    [...] Sure enough: the publisher, Scientific Research Publishing, is on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013. [...]

    Reply
60. David says:

    April 30, 2013 at 6:13 PM

    InTech publishers too. They seemed to be doing good in Europe. What’s wrong with them?

    Reply
61. SCOTT says:

    May 1, 2013 at 4:05 PM

    What do you have to say about JOURNALS BANK?

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      May 1, 2013 at 4:08 PM

      I actually added that publisher to my list yesterday.

      Reply
62. Masood Raja says:

    May 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

    I am so gratified to see Academic Exchange Quarterly on this list. A few years ago, I had the misfortune of dealing with them and their tactics to charge money for simple and undesired changes to my paper were sad. When I pointed it out on my blog, they tried to pressure me into retracting my opinion. Never heard back from them after I suggested that I could make the entire record of our correspondence public.
    Thank you so much for your great service to academic community. The link to this is no longer on my own blog, but can be found on one of my former co-editor’s blog: http://dynamicsubspace.net/2009/02/27/academic-exchange-quarterlys-publishing-scam/

    Reply
63. SCOTT says:

    May 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

    Could you please create a list of reputable, ‘non -predatory’ journals? it appears a large percentage of OA journals are on your list.

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      May 2, 2013 at 1:35 PM

      I recommend this list: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/scholarlycommunication/oa_fees.html

      Reply
64. Clayton R. Wright’s list of ed tech and related conferences | Rick's Café Canadien says:

    May 14, 2013 at 11:32 AM

    […] or Jeffry Beale’s list of questionable publishers and organizations http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/ so that you could consider whether you want to attend events sponsored by these organizations.) All […]

    Reply
65. Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 | Scholarly Open Access | Thinking it out says:

    May 14, 2013 at 1:19 PM

    […] http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/12/06/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2013/ […]

    Reply
66. Publisher Threatens Librarian With $1 Billion Lawsuit - NPR (blog) - Ag2 Literary Agency says:

    May 15, 2013 at 4:42 PM

    […] publisher named on “Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013″ is OMICS Publishing Group, which told him this week that it “intends to sue Mr. Beall, and […]

    Reply
67. benabrahamse says:

    May 17, 2013 at 11:20 AM

    As an ARL librarian I have forwarded this to our office of scholarly communications to make sure they get the word out. You are doing a great service.

    Reply
68. Peter says:

    May 18, 2013 at 11:29 PM

    The answer of whether predatory or not is out there. We have not heard from the publishers enlisted by Jeff. My university assumed they are all false journals and did not give any credit to papers published on thse journal. On the dark side, those manuscripts could not be resended to other publishing journals because of repetition. Any ideas of should we re submit our work to the others for publication? because we are chetaed.

    Reply
69. moom says:

    May 21, 2013 at 3:31 AM

    This looks like another one just started:

    http://www.sciencewebpublishing.net/index.htm

    No articles yet and no editorial board etc. But they sent me an article to review. Actually, it was related to my research which was surprising for this kind of journal.

    Reply
70. moom says:

    May 21, 2013 at 5:16 AM

    I turned them down and they immediately sent me an e-mail inviting me to be an editor or editorial board member….

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.