Geroge Perry
When I analyze and investigate possible predatory publishers, there is one name that I frequently see: George Perry.
Professor Perry is the Dean of the College of Sciences at the University of Texas at San Antonio. He’s a biologist and specializes in the cytopathology of Alzheimer’s disease. Dr. Perry’s vita is extremely extensive and impressive, except for one thing.
He is the editor-in-chief of numerous questionable journals and serves as a member of the editorial board of many other questionable journals. More worrisome, he’s the editor-in-chief of no less than seven OMICS Publishing Group’s journals, a publisher I have identified as among the worst of the predatory publishers.
The table below shows predatory journals for which he’s the editor-in-chief or associate editor-in-chief:
|
Journal |
Publisher |
Position |
| Journal of Analytical and Bioanalytical Techniques | OMICS | EIC |
| Journal of Biotechnology & Biomaterials | OMICS | EIC |
| Journal of Bioequivalence & Bioavailability | OMICS | EIC |
| Journal of Cytology & Histology | OMICS | EIC |
| Journal of Cell Science & Therapy | OMICS | EIC |
| Journal of Marine Science: Research & Development | OMICS | EIC |
| Pharmaceutical Regulatory Affairs: Open Access | OMICS | EIC |
| The Open Pathology Journal | Bentham Open | Co-EIC |
| Atlas Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences | Atlas Publishing | EIC |
| International Journal of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences | IDOSI | Assoc. EIC |
| Annual Review & Research in Biology | ScienceDomain | EIC |
| Note: EIC means editor-in-chief |
Also, according to his vita, he’s serving as the associate editor of the following BioInfo Publications journals:
- 2010-16 Associate Editor, International Journal of Drug Discovery
- 2010-16 Associate Editor, International Journal of Biotechnology Applications
- 2010-15 Associate Editor, Neuroscience Research
- 2010-15 Associate Editor, Advances in Medical Information
- 2010-15 Associate Editor, International Journal of Parisitology Research
- 2010-16 Associate Editor, The Advances in Computational Research
BioInfo Publications is another publisher I’ve identified as predatory; it is a mega-publisher with over 300 journal titles. Perry also holds an honorary position, the President Editor for Global Journals, another one of the publishers on my list.
I see two problems here. First, Dr. Perry doesn’t seem to discriminate when he receives the same invitations to serve on editorial boards that we all receive. Why would such a renowned scholar allow himself to be associated with such low-quality, dubious, and sketchy journals?
Second, I don’t understand how it is physically possible for one human being to serve in so many positions and also serve as the dean of a college. I think this would require more than 24 hours work per day. Dr. Perry also serves on editorial and editorial board positions on numerous (more than 100) legitimate journals.
I sent Dr. Perry an email asking him about this and received the following response on February 27, 2013:
Excommunicating Scientific Discourse from the Imprimatur of Authority
George Perry
College of Sciences, University of Texas at San Antonio,
San Antonio, Texas 78249Major human advances have closely followed those of communication technology; language, writing, printing and electronics have each changed the economy of information dissemination. Electronic publication has swept over our world to put information at the fingertips of most at an affordable cost, while only beginning to address the social context of scientific publication and its reliance on social and scientific norms through the peer review structure. We have to look back over five centuries to the invention of printing and its use, first as a means to continue the old order of the Catholic Church through printing Bibles and indulgences, and later as Luther’s tool in the Reformation. Academic order and scientific publication emanated from authority, whether from learned societies or the pope. Imprimatur was critical in a world of limited information availability and low educational attainment, and where searching for absolutes was viewed as essential. Reliance on journal reputation and rigorous review does add value, as did the imprimatur, but at what cost? In the Renaissance it restricted Galileo, Copernicus, and countless others now unknown because their ideas were repressed. In a time when information can be rapidly compared, cross-checked and corrected, does retarding information from hypotheses, ‘failed’ experiments or novel but developing supporting ideas advance knowledge? WebmedCentral has addressed this issue head-on by developing two parallel journals, one with post-publication review and the other with pre-publication review. Both are based on peer review that embraces and looks to leadership from the scientific community for validity rather than narrow authority. These are exciting times for publishing and even more so for the truth.
Pretty good example of a political corect non-answer.
If we were to embrace Dr. Perry’s ideas, we would require that ALL predatory open publishers had an efficient system of eliminating manuscripts that didn’t pass post-publication review AND informing this to ALL the people who had read the failed manuscript. They should also ensure rogorous post-publishing review. WebmedCentral must be seen as an experiment only.
His wiki page doesn’t include those publications: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Perry_%28neuroscientist%29
I think they should be added to his Professional Appointments
Everyone has a right to choose whatever they want as long as they have a sound reason behind that. Even I think the predatory publishers are a serious problem in the academic world, however, I appreciate Dr George Perry’s choice and reason.
I strongly disagree with you on this post, Jeffrey. We should opine and debate about open-access journals’ quality and policies, but not attack persons.
If a scholar attached his name and reputation to a publication, there is absolutely no problem in publicly stating that they are associated with these publications. Statements of fact should never be feared in academics.
Trevor, I regret you see this as a personal attack. I did not intend it as an attack. It is meant as an inquiry. Dr. Perry is a public figure, and as a critical thinker, I think it’s reasonable to question why he is the EiC and on the editorial boards of so many questionable journals.
We, Americans, believe so much in fair competition and market mechanism. Let the market work on its own. Scholars and academic decision-makers are not stupid; they know their potential levels of attainment and retention. For instance, those OA publications would not be considered at all for a Harvard professor. However, there might be many teaching-oriented schools that do not mind having their professors publish in those journals (rather than not publishing at all). Similar analogy is, why I am stranded at University of B…surely and logically because I am not offered a position at University of A.
My thrust is: let the market decide. Low quality products and services will die due to competitive process. Unless we want to become like those sub-par and poor countries where universities, accreditation institutions and everything are heavily regulated.
Hi, Trevor,
Part of the free market includes reviews, commentaries, case studies, investigative reports, and the like. For example, if someone publishes a book, the free market includes people who write and publish book reviews about the book. The review component is a secondary free market that adds value to the first free market. The magazine Consumer Reportsis another example. So, you are correct that the market will decide. It will decide with the help of the free press that describes and evaluates what the free market has to offer.
Jeffrey
If Dr. Perry has such a low view of publishing, why is he so heavily invested in it?
I very much doubt that the OMICS Publishing Group actually pays Dr. George Perry for his services. So why does he continue to be associated with them???
Wow. That’s a very long non-answer, but at least it’s original (not copied from the interwebs).
@Trevor — he’s not attacking him. He’s questioning his professional ability to undertake the obligations of a REAL Assoc Editor, since NOT working responsibly either support predatory journals OR leads to poor results for a legitimate journal.
I guess that at some point in a scientific career, collecting memberships in editoral board can become addictive, much in the same way as executive/administrative board memberships become addictive to managers and politicians. The danger being, of course, besides the fact that it is impossible to contribute meaningfully to too many boards, that the risk of becoming involved in a scandal increases. I believe one should think twice before accepting membership in an editorial board, and ask oneself (1) do I endorse the politics of this publisher? and (2) do I have the time to make the job seriously?
Very interesting. I agree we are none the wiser. My Dean works every day of the week. On being a Dean.
[...] It’s definitely worth a visit to Beall’s site. Not only does he keep an up-to-date list of publishers and journals that are “predatory” in nature, he also shares much of his investigation into particular circumstances, such as this one guy who is the “Editor in Chief” of several “journals.” [...]
[...] and discusses in his blog about actual people involved in many of these shady publishing platforms (one example and another one). He even keeps an eye on plagiarism [...]