New Bottom-Feeding OA Journal: American Research Thoughts

American Research Thoughts


American Research thoughts is a new open-access journal published by a Romanian-Indian team of two people. The title American Research Thoughts is not suitable for a professional scholarly journal, and the rest of the operation is unprofessional as well.

The journal is published by Ecaterina Patrascu from Romania, and Kishor V Shetti, from India. In fact, authors who publish in the journal can send their article processing fees directly into Mr. Shetti’s bank account:

American Research Thoughts 2.jpg

Your money goes into this guy’s personal bank account.

… or they can use PayPal and send the money to Ecaterina’s PayPal account:

American Research Thoughts 3.jpg

Or you can send your money to Cati’s PayPal account.

The publishing fee is $30. There is no explanation why a Romanian / Indian collaboration is publishing a journal with “American” in the title. Perhaps they think this title will generate more article submissions (and therefore revenue)?

The journal launched even before getting an ISSN:


Oops, forgot something.

Ecaterina is the owner of another low-quality scholarly open access journal, called European Academic Research.

European Academic Research


The journal boasts that it has an impact factor of 3.1, but the metric is assigned by Universal Impact Factor, a fake metrics company.

In closing, I offer a genuine American research thought — my own: Avoid these two journals at all costs.

33 Responses to New Bottom-Feeding OA Journal: American Research Thoughts

  1. The other journal mentioned: European Academic Research, is included in DOAJ which is supposed to have a sturdy selection policy nowadays.

  2. Samir Sharma says:

    The editor of this journal makes use of different loose Groups in Facebook to post free advertisements and attract potential authors, who are, in turn, eager to earn credits for Promotion. The editor shamelessly attracts the authors (many of them are not so innocent and are themselves academic thugs and compulsive plagiarists) on this point that her ‘International’ journal will give them more number/credits. The situation is very serious now.

    • Leslie says:

      “Academic thugs and compulsive plagiarists”! Love this!

      • Koushik Pal says:

        Please check this
        A band of [deleted]!

      • Koushik Pal and Samir Sharma - not! says:

        Koushik Pal and Samir Sharma. I must respectfully object to the language you have used publically to describe 100% of an entire editor board. Please note that such language carries massive negative consequences for the scientific community because then sites like Beall’s blog will be labelled as sites that allow for libelous comments and unsupported attacks on professionals to pass. You need only see the case of PubPeer and Prof. Sarkar to understand that a veritable war has emerged between the critics and those being criticized [1]. This can even lead to a serious backlash [2]. That said, may I suggest that you please indicate, in as much detail as possible, which individuals you consider to be “robbers” (i.e., thieves) (and the same applies to Samir Sharma when referring to “academic thugs and compulsive plagiarists”), providing evidence publically of such serious misconduct and crimes. One thing is to make a wild and popular accusation. It is a totally different thing to make that accusation with hard-core evidence. The former can be construed as libel, but the latter will garner attention and support for action against the individual publically. The scientific community looks forward to reading the evidence of your claims.

  3. ali mohammed says:

    Dear Beeal

    Would you please inform me if this conference is a prediatory. WRICET2014 (WORLD RESEARCH AND INNOVATION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY)


    • I generally limit my work to open-access journals and publishers.

    • Dave Langers says:

      Just a quick question, Ali Mohammed: If /you/ don’t know the meeting, and if you don’t know /anyone/ that knows the meeting, then why would you be wanting to go there…?

      • Not Romanian, or Indian says:

        I’ll bet Mr. Mohammed, like millions from developing countries, particularly in the Middle East and the Indian sub-continent, are getting money to travel to “international” meetings. So, they don’t really care where it is, what’s it’s about, or who runs it. As long as it says indexed in XYZ, and maybe some phony claims about ISI, or Scopus – like a zillion spam/scam e-mails I get each week, particularly from China – then their idiotic research institutes are responsible for proliferating this fraud. If the money source were to dry up, then these equally idiotic scientists who abuse the system would also wither away into insignificance. The fact that their universities are built up of technocrats who don’t know the difference between a cream bun and a marshmallow, but who are willing to dish out funding to support pseudo-academic trips to pseudo-academic meetings – like those organized by Omics – proves that the rot in science and publishing is actually being instigated by a higher level than scientists. Cut all funding to OA publishing and let’s see how quickly Beall’s list of “predators” will shrink. I suggest not only adding pressure into the thin-walled skulls of individuals like Mohammed, but also of clearing the management that run Mohammed’s institute. Like weeds, pseudo-researchers and their pseudo-institutes need to be cut off at the roots. The voices of discontent have been too soft for too long, and look at how deep the mess has become, with no end in sight to the level or complexity of the fraud that affects us all. Only severe public shaming and criminal prosecution can save us now.

      • Ahmad Hassanat says:

        Mohammad just asked a simple question, why “Not Romanian, not Indian” is so harsh in replying.
        I am from a Jordanian university, what “Not Romanian, not Indian” said about funding any conference is not true…
        they never paid for a conference her, we have to pay for everything even the registration fees.

      • J.J. says:

        That is a question I frequently ask myself. The same goes for bad journals. Are these people doing research alone in a desert?

        Your supervisor, peers, colleagues surely know very well which are the good conferences and journals in your field. And if you are the most experienced person in your research group and still don’t know that, there is something wrong with the hiring process at your institution.

        I suspect a lot of authors who submit to bogus conferences and shady journals are well aware of their pay-for-publish nature, for a variety of reasons their research is not publishable in reputable venues and they hope to trick their (usually naive) institution by showing a long list of bogus publications.

        An exception to this are inexperienced researchers who fell for the ‘open-access-is-good-karma’ argument from some established researchers and thought they were genuinely doing something good for society by paying 500$ of grant money to a ‘publisher’ operating from an internet cafe.

    • Johnny Whiteman says:

      If you have to ask, then the answer is, “Yeah, probably.”

  4. […] new journal, American Research Thoughts, is neither American nor thoughtful, according to Jeffrey Beall. […]

  5. I appreciate the creativity behind the title of this journal, which sets it apart from the usual “International Journal of This and That”.

  6. Dear Jeffrey,

    Let us follow some logics here:
    1. You wrote this post on October 30th and included American Research Thoughts in your list on…. October 20th (sic!). The first issue of this journal was uploaded on November 2nd. Since I suppose both of us use chronological time as an objective guidance of our lives, may I kindly ask which were your criteria to include a NON-EXISTENT journal in your list?!
    2. ISSN number in Romania functions like this: for online journals, one must upload the first issue and then apply for it. In order not to misinform your followers, could you kindly check first rules and regulations?
    3. It seems that you really have a problem with Indians — here, I shall add no further comment.
    4. Paypal account is institutional — again, try to use my email address there and you shall see what name is displayed. You, again, rush into things without any previous checking.
    5. AMERICAN Research Thoughts — dear Jeffrey, are you sure AMERICAN refers only to NORTH AMERICANS???

    My advice: kindly get informed before blaming; follow chronology accurately, not chaotically, and YES, there are other areas of this world, besides AMERICA :)

    Ecaterina / Cati ( according to your politeness….)

    To help you a bit: We are going to launch a new journal soon, please follow us daily

    • I stand by my inclusion of this “journal” on my list and advise honest scholars to avoid it.

    • Cati, I am not! says:

      I always like to look at more menial things like the qualifications of the individuals that head up a publisher, for example their academic records. Although your response to Beall was applauded because you had the courage to come forward and defend yourself, your response was very aggressively defensive. Also, your academic credentials do not lend support to you being classified as a “publisher” on LinkedIn (, listed as Maharashtra Solapur, or even as an academic. A search of all major academic data-bases (PubMed, Scopus, SpringerLink, etc.) reveals a very hollow publishing record, which suggests that you have very poor experience with dealing with academics, and publishing. So, the question I have for you, to be honest, Cati, is what exactly are your credentials and experience that would make you a reliable, and qualified “publisher”? This is an excellent opportunity to show-case your credentials publically in defense of your image and that of your company.

    • Dear “E. P.”,

      Could you explain what definition of “America”, North or otherwise, includes Romania or India?

      Neuroskeptic or “Oske”

  7. If possible, I will add it here.

  8. I would also be extremely delighted and it will show a form of respect if your REAL identity were revelead. I believe that assuming who you are (Cati, I am not!) is the premise of a real dialogue, especially since we are on a platform where REAL names are used and reputations are at stake. Thank you very much.

    • Cati, I am not! says:

      Dear Ecatarina, have you ever heard of anonymity? It serves to protect – not hide – the identity of individuals who wish to comment openly and freely, without a backlash against their personas by the public, or by peers. You can Google Guy Fawkes and The Million Mask March to get an idea of the importance of the anonymous movements, including in science. It is a legitimate form of communication, and as such, I continue with my pseudonym, Cati, I am not! Most respectable academics will have an official institutional web-page or even a personal web-age that lists their credentials, their experience, their publications, etc. It is obvious that the anonymous crown will not reveal their e-mails publically. In contrast, you, in the position as Editor-in-Chief and as one individual who is making profit from this enterprise, have the responsibility fo showing your professional profile publically. The web-site of your journals does not reveal your professional CV, nor can a search on Google find one either. If you have nothing to hide, then please provide the link to the web-site that lists your full list of professional qualifications, publications, participation in congresses and any other qualifications that would make you suitably qualified to be EIC (and apparently also CEO) of this company. And now that we are on the issue of accountability and public transparency, can you please indicate how much money your company paid to obtain the false Universal Impact Factor?

  9. Dear Cati, I am not! Personally, I consider your hiding as follows: 1. Mocking me and the readers here (if any!) 2. a form of cowardice — opinions are uttered by individuals, not by shadows, by people who are NOT AFRAID to stand up for what they think and who they are. Consequently, since we are not involved in a real dialogue, I cannot go on with any other comment. I am sorry, it is below my dignity. Meanwhile, keep searching for my CV — it is fully available online and, guess where?! — at my very working place. Good luck!

    • I’m a long time reader here and I don’t consider anonymous comments to be mocking. Nor cowardice.

      On the contrary, when people come here, using their own names, and refuse to answer simple questions then I think that is both of those things!

  10. Ahmad Hassanat says:

    Dear Ecaterina Patrascu,
    I recommend to change the name of the journal to be “Indian Research Thoughts”. accept the challenge, accept only the good research papers and show them the reality of your journal.
    I understand your defense here. it is not only the American who participate to knowledge and science. it is all the world, the Americans and the westerns in general enjoy massive amount of money to do their research, that why their contribution is higher.
    for example the last Indian space mission, it was successful from the first time, and costs around $75 millions, how much does NASA costs the Americans?

    • Cati, I am not! says:

      Cati, you are right, your CV can be found in two locations:
      Your speciality is English and Romanian literature. But not science. I thus ask, how can you be the Editor-in-Chief and guarantee the quality, as the ultimate acadmemic of your organization, of topics as broadly as: stress in high school soccer players, pest control in apples and cauliflower, Islamic education, pulmonary tuberculosis among fishermen, type 2 diabetes, witness protection, brown Pakistani seaweeds, reproductive diseases in cows and goats, among other esoteric themes ( In general, the EIC represents the maximum academic authority of that topic, and either alot of your skills and background in these varies topics is missing from your CV, or in fact you have not been able to offer professional trained oversight of the papers published in this pseudo-academic journal. Your lack of expertise is starkly contrasted in certificates of guarantee about quality assurance (e.g.,, which ironically and incidentally contains a blatant error in the title), but are willing to charge as much as 30 US$ for pseudo-quality assurance. It appears as if Bridge Center Publication is the umbrella core for four journals ( European Academic Research, Global Shakespeare Journal, Academic Research Review, and the topic of this story, American Research Thoughts. I would agree with Neuroskeptic above regarding the evasion of publically pertinent queries.

  11. Samir Sharma says:

    A draft of letter for demanding action against the predatory journals, journal-makers is in the making. It will be sent to the Ministry of Human Resource Department, Govt. of India, to the Chairman of the University Grants Commission, to the Vice-chancellor or/and principal of the institution where the predatory journal makers work as govt. employees and still make illegal black money by paid publication, and to the Income Tax Authority of India (both state and central agencies). However, if this does not work, a Public Interest Litigation will be filed. Demands will also be made for action against scholars and teachers who have been benefited from publishing in such junk journals. The OA societies in India are working for their own promotion and some individual must come up. And someone will finally come forward soon and seal the fate of predators. However, Indian Law cannot take against people involved in black business outside India. But many thanks to Mr. Beall for taking up the cudgel and showing us the way.

    • Thank you India says:

      Well, well, well, this is an extremely interesting and pertinent revelation. An Indian who is willing to stand up against Indians. And it confirms – by an Indian scientist – what I have claimed just last week: that corruption in science publishing, at least in India, is stemming from both the bottom, and the top. I had also suggested that the only way to fix this problem, at least in India, was by Indians, because the opinions of foreigners are aggressively set aside. I had even made a less-than-subtle suggestion to Mr. Modi to get his act together and reign in fraud emanating from Indian scientists, Indian institutes and Indian pseudo-publishers [1]. A massive amount of damage has already been done by Indian individuals from within India and even by Indians residing abroad, and until this global-scale fraud is urgently addressed at the Government level, the corruption of the literature, of science, and of publishing, is going to get exponentially worse. For a simple reason: those who have already committed any form of fraud, misconduct, or financial abuse, have suffered zero, or mild consequences for their actions. So, they see this as a sign to commit the same level of atrocities against science, without any consequences, moving forward. Unless individuals like Samir Sharma – who must be valiantly applauded for his genuine interest in trying to clean up the mess – are able to instigate change. Change, ethics, and the rule of law in science and publishing, and justice that favors the honest as opposed to the crooks and cheats, can only emerge when there is a grass-roots level of aner, and subsequent change. I have great respect for many Indian scientists, some of whom are close and respected friends, so those who will be quick to call these criticisms vitriolic racist rants, think again. This is about culture, in fact, because India, as one of the core BRICS members, is a key economy forging aggressively forward. And it appears as if pseudo-science and fraudulent publishers form part of that new economic model. Both Indians and non-Indian scientists alike have the responsibility of standing up to this corruption, to this fraud, to this wide-spread dishonesty. It must be mercilessly stamped out, and those who cheat, commit fraud, or otherwise defraud the system, or abuse or predate financially upon the weaknesses of others, must be shamed, and ultimately sent to prison. There can be no middle-path. It’s either beef, or chicken, not both. Samir Sharma, and others who are like-minded, have my fullest support.


  12. Koushik Pal says:

    Why has a Romanian-Indian venture booked a ‘.us’ domain? Just to help it in looking more ‘American’? And fool more people? What a plague on the world!

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

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

You are commenting using your 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: