It's also part of the reason for the development of new third-party "journal selection" services (primarily aimed at researchers in emerging economies), such as from Edanz, Research Square and elsewhere
-Mark ============================= Mark Ware m...@markwareconsulting.com +44 117 959 3726 > On 23 Sep 2014, at 23:51, Dana Roth <dzr...@library.caltech.edu> wrote: > > If it is such a minor annoyance, why would Elsevier find it necessary to > issue a "Warning regarding fraudulent call for papers" ... See: > > http://www.elsevier.com/journal-authors/authors-update/authors-update/warning-re.-fraudulent-call-for-papers > > or the necessity of Jeffrey Beall's extensive listing of predatory publishers > at: > > http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/ > > I suspect that David Prosser grossly underestimates the problems these > publishers cause for researchers in less developed countries. > > > > Dana L. Roth > Millikan Library / Caltech 1-32 > 1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125 > 626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540 > dzr...@library.caltech.edu > http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm > ________________________________________ > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] on behalf of David > Prosser [david.pros...@rluk.ac.uk] > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 1:30 AM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Interesting Current Science opinion paper on "Predatory > Journals" > > Quote: Predatory publishing has damaged the very foundations of scholarly and > academic publishing, > > No it hasn’t. It’s a minor annoyance, at most. > > David > > > > On 23 Sep 2014, at 07:47, anup kumar das > <anupdas2...@gmail.com<mailto:anupdas2...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Predatory Journals and Indian Ichthyology > by R. Raghavan, N. Dahanukar, J.D.M. Knight, A. Bijukumar, U. Katwate, K. > Krishnakumar, A. Ali and S. Philip > Current Science, 2014, 107(5), 740-742. > > Although the 21st century began with a hope that information and > communication technology will act as a boon for reinventing taxonomy, the > advent and rise of electronic publications, especially predatory open-access > journals, has resulted in an additional challenge (the others being gap, > impediment and urgency) for taxonomy in the century of extinctions. > Predatory publishing has damaged the very foundations of scholarly and > academic publishing, and has led to unethical behaviour from scientists and > researchers. The ‘journal publishing industry’ in India is a classical > example of ‘predatory publishing’, supported by researchers who are in a race > to publish. The urge to publish ‘quick and easy’ can be attributed to two > manifestations, i.e.‘impactitis’ and ‘mihi itch’. While impactitis can be > associated with the urge for greater impact factor (IF) and scientific merit, > mihi itch (loosely) explains the behaviour of researchers, especially > biologists publishing in predatory journals yearning to see their name/s > associated with a new ‘species name’. Most predatory journals do not have an > IF, and authors publishing in such journals are only seeking an ‘impact’ > (read without factor), and popularity by seeing their names appear in print > media. This practice has most often led to the publication of substandard > papers in many fields, including ichthyology. > > Download Full-text Article: > http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/107/05/0740.pdf > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org<mailto:GOAL@eprints.org> > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
