Study of Predatory Open Access Nursing Journals

Oermann et al. (2016) report on a systematic study of predatory open-access nursing journals:

“There were 140 predatory nursing journals from 75 publishers. Most journals were new, having been inaugurated in the past 1 to 2 years. One important finding was that many journals only published one or two volumes and then either ceased publishing or published fewer issues and articles after the first volume. Journal content varied widely, and some journals published content from dentistry and medicine, as well as nursing. Qualitative findings from the surveys confirmed previously published anecdotal evidence, including authors selecting journals based on spam emails and inability to halt publication of a manuscript, despite authors’ requests to do so. . . . Predatory journals exist in nursing and bring with them many of the “red flags” that have been noted in the literature, including lack of transparency about editorial processes and misleading information promoted on websites. The number of journals is high enough to warrant concern in the discipline about erosion of our scholarly literature.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27706886

Advertisements

Listen to Reviewers!

A fine editorial by Dr. Karen Morin, RN, FAAN, has some good advice for nurse authors: Pay attention to reviewers!

Morin describes reviewers’ pet peeves (lack of conceptual congruency, poorly written manuscripts, limited reviews of the literature) and provides suggestions (offer something new and important, get peer review of drafts prior to submission, follow instructions and proofread).

https://www.healio.com/nursing/journals/jne/2017-2-56-2/%7Bd96af37a-aef2-48cd-8dcf-ef5d40db406c%7D/what-reviewers-say-authors-listen-up

ALPSP: Navigating through the minefield of predatory publishing

The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers offers some timely and concise guidance on avoiding the perishable publishing of predatory online open access journals:

http://blog.alpsp.org/2017/08/KnowledgeE.html 

Think. Check. Submit.

With the closing earlier this year of Jeffrey Beall’s ScholarlyOA web site and the recent introduction of a subscription service that reviews online open-access journals, there is still a space for open-access guidance to scholars and researchers.

Consider Think. Check. Submit. http://thinkchecksubmit.org/

Sharing research results with the world is key to the progress of your discipline and career. But with so many publications, how can you be sure you can trust a particular journal? Follow this check list to make sure you choose trusted journals for your research.

Predatory Online Open-Access Journals: Cabell’s White/Black Lists

As readers of NursingWriting.com are familiar, a profusion of online open-access journals, many with dubious review, editing, and publishing practices and dependent on authors’ fees (rather than subscriptions) has created problems for researchers, students and clinicians.

Previously, a web site run by Jeffrey Beall (ScholarlyOA) as a volunteer effort outside his day job offered frank assessments of publishers and journals (though often not without controversy). That site was closed down earlier this year.

Now, however, the commercial publisher Cabells has developed a White List (good journals) and Black List (bad journals), available for a subscription fee.

You can find a review here: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/07/25/cabells-new-predatory-journal-blacklist-review/ 

And the Cabells site here: https://cabells.com/

Top 10 Avoidable Author Mistakes

Your Guide to Possibly/Probably Predatory Online Open-Access Journals

As regular readers of NursingWriting.com are well aware, in recent years the scholarly publishing landscape has become confused with online open-access journals whose publishers employ aggressive spam marketing and dubious peer review and publishing practices.

For centuries, traditional publishers have used a subscription business model: the cost of publishing and circulation a journal is subsidized by subscribers who have exclusive access to the material. The proliferation of the World-Wide Web and expanded wireless or WiFi bandwidth has introduced a new business model: open-access journals whose costs are subsidized by the authors who are published in it, not by readers. This business model introduces a conflict of interest: the journal needs to publish authors who pay the journal. Some online open-access journals appear to employ little or no reputable peer-review and some publish junk science. (It pays the bills!)

Assembled by members of the International Academy of Nurse Editors are a variety of resources to help you discern which online open-access journals are reliable.

A statement provided by the Academy’s Predatory Publishing Practices Collective http://naepub.com/predatory-publishing/2014-24-3-2/

A list of journal editorials published on the topic of standards for open-access publishing https://nursingeditors.com/inane-initiatives/open-access-editorial-standards/editorials-published-open-access-editorial-standards/

Articles in the online publication Nurse Author & Editor concerning predatory publishing http://naepub.com/category/predatory-publishing/

Librarian Jeffrey Beall’s “black list” of “possibly/probably predatory journals” https://scholarlyoa.com/

A “white list” of respected and credible nursing journals https://nursingeditors.com/journals-directory/