17 Responses to New OA Publisher Launches with 107 Journals, Fakes Association with Elsevier

  1. Yurii says:

    I suggest forwarding this to Elsevier. Let their lawyers have fun with this publisher.

    • Steve says:


      ELSEVIER team normally watch this blog and take necessary actions so that their fake journals like “Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences” would not confused with new rivals.


  2. P Canning says:

    My heart will go on….crying….at what open access is doing to the scholarly world.

    • yes you are right Canning. There must be a “check and balance” system for OA…

    • DR says:

      ‘…at what people greedy for money are doing to the scholarly world’ <— Fixed that for you.

    • The Iron Chemist says:

      This is more like open abcess publishing. This sort of crap is just going to continue until (A) university administrators actually take the time to assess their faculty’s work and (B) more of the ethical researchers amongst us stop acting like they just fell off the turnip truck. If you’re naive enough to get suckered by one of these outfits in this day and age, you probably shouldn’t publish at all. I hate to be mean, but come on.

      • Apparently banned? says:

        That universities should be employing armies of administrators to “actually take the time to assess their faculty’s work” is an insane view. Assessment of research is not something that can be done by non-specialists, and universities already suffer from an over-abundance of administrative staff relative to teachers and researchers.

  3. Interesting, and sad. FYI I did a whois search on the domain sprintjournals.com and it appears to have been registered by someone named Lorenzo Allovisio (or the reverse) back in July:


    There is no phone number or email listed for him, but there is an address that seems real:


    Also, one other note on this: I looked at a couple of the webpages for their journals, and they do list at least one recent article for each. For example, their veterinary journal lists a paper with authors who appear to be real people, living in Nigeria:



    It may not be hard to locate the person behind this effort, or to at least confirm whether the authors listed on the journal sites actually submitted to the journals in question, and who they dealt with.

    Why do I care so much? Because I do the same kind of research in the field of journalism. For example:

    Keep up the good work!

    Best regards,

  4. Yes you are right !

    My best guess: this is a reboot of the “Academic Journals” because they got scrapped out of the ISI/WoS index, so they are trying to sneak back but they haven’t learn the lesson yet…
    If you try to compare the list of journals with those published by academic journals, you will see why I am guessing it like that. They haven’t even bothered to change the names of journals.
    It is your gift to the scientific community so Keep up the good work!


  5. Farid says:

    I would like to confirm that the people behind this website are more likely the same as the people who setup AcademicJournals.org. Here are my reasons:

    1. The site uses the same web design as Academic Journals does.
    2. The person who designs the logo must be the same. In fact, I believe the covers of their journals look professional in most cases.

    Poor they end up doing such activities. They started publishing some highly cited papers in one of their journals named African Journal of business management and managed to get listed on both Scopus and ISI. However, once they got popular for their indexation, they started accepting virtually everything and eventually got delisted from ISI and Scopus. For a certain period time, Scopus database did not show any trace of African Journal of Business Management. They normally asked for 550$ but in many cases they were ready to give up to 100% discount. I saw some papers, which were plagiarized and could be easily detected but they accepted them without caring about some basic ethics. These kinds of activities have hurt other OA publishers. I hope this blog gives them a signal that it is better for them just to change their greedy behavior and start working with some ethical rules as stated on their website. Building a new website is not a good idea and they need to learn that scientific society helps detect fraud quickly.

    Maybe Mr Beall could make some more comments on this.

    • Chidinma Okorie says:

      This is pure bias! Did you bother to check if academic journals still has a website and wouldn’t it be foolish for them to launch same journals with a ‘sprint’ addition to the names? Do well to visit http://www.academicjournals.org before making hasty conclusions

  6. Their main page contains text taken from Elsevier’s homepage. e.g.

    “Provides answers to support critical decisions in chemistry-related research fields” (from here).

    Their “bottom bar” (“Industries”… “Evidence”) is also the same as Elsevier’s except their links don’t work.

  7. Marco says:

    When I open the website, my tab says “World Elsivier Journal” (Elsivier, yes, not Elsevier).

    • Ole, Ole! says:

      I fully support the inclusion of this “publisher” on Beall’s list. My primary concern is how such publishers affect plant science. I thus identified two journals which are currently publishing by this publisher and have identified the following problems:
      a) The current issue (see cover) of May 2014 claims that it is volume 9, volume 22. Yet, the back issue button is not working, which suggests that in fact volumes 1-8 do not exist, and that the publisher is lying about the past content, or irresponsibly not showing the content of volumes 1-8. The cover style design is very similar to that used by Academic Journals from Nigeria.
      b) Who peer reviewed the first three articles? There is no editor board, so did accounting do the work?
      c) Take a look at a typical PDF file:
      The e-mails and telephone/fax appear on the header of every page. Absolute lack of sense and professionalism.
      d) In this journal, only three articles, from Sudan and Kenya, very weak analyses that most likely would not have been able to publish elsewhere. But, this is how it starts.
      e) None of these buttons work:
      Editorial Policies
      Publication Ethics
      Instructions for Authors
      Reviewers Guidelines
      Submit Manuscripts
      Track Your Manuscript
      Another journal with a very similar title, making SPRJAR redundant, is Sprint Journal of Agricultural SCIENCE (SPRJAS).
      The problems are identical to those in SPRJAR, with a bit more spice:
      f) Two papers by Shrivastava are a clear case of salami slicing. OA has no page limits, so splitting one method into two data sets for two papers to increase the number of publications is of concern. Perhaps with two papers the first author could then obtain his/her PhD?
      g) A Pakistani/German collaboration (http://sprintjournals.com/pdf/SPRJAS-02-117.pdf) fails to show the use of other DNA barcoding studies (e.g., Jeanson et al. 2011; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3219495/) making this a snub paper. Snub publishing can threaten the integrity of science since it represents the inaccurate representation of the literature.
      h) Figures of the Nunes et al. (Brazil) paper (http://sprintjournals.com/pdf/SPRJAS-02-129.pdf) plucked straight from the Nunes (2012) PhD thesis (compare Fig 3a and 3b on page 5 of the SPRJAS paper with Fig. 5a and 5b of the thesis, page 49 of the PDF (http://www.bibliotecaflorestal.ufv.br/bitstream/handle/123456789/6639/dissertacao_Shirley%20Tavares%20Nunes.pdf?sequence=1) simply translated.

  8. wimcrusio says:

    Note that the image of the cover of the Oral etc journal has “ScienceDirect” at the top, claiming another connection with Elsevier…

  9. […] at the Journal itself — which is one of a group of 107 open-access journals. According to this report they were at one time misleadingly indicating an association with Elsevier, although they […]

  10. Benno says:

    Don’t know where (thread) to put it. ‘Got another (means not the first) unsolicited Email from Elsevier, “Join Heliyon in celebrating the publication of our 100th paper. Read some of the most read articles we’ve published across a wide range of disciplines”, etc., etc..
    I know Jeffrey spares Elsevier any critique, but isn’t this procedure (Email sending) a central criterion for being ‘predatory’? Any opinions, similar experience of the community?

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal.

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: