Tag: predatory journals

Allegedly, there are over 12.000 so called predatory journals out there. Instead of supporting readers and science, these journals serve their own economic interests first and at best offer dubious merits for scholars. We believe that scholars working in any academic discipline have a professional interest and a responsibility to keep track of these journals. It is our job to warn the young or inexperienced of journals where a publication or editorship could be detrimental to their career and science is not served. We have seen “predatory” publishing take off in a big way and noticed how colleagues start to turn up in the pages of some of these journals. While many have assumed that this phenomenon mainly is a problem for low status universities, there are strong indications that predatory publishing is a part of a major trend towards the industrialization of misconduct and that it affects many top-flight research institutions (see Priyanka Pulla: “In India, elite institutes in shady journals”, Science 354(6319): 1511-1512). This trend, referred to by some as the dark side of publishing, needs to be reversed.

Thus we published this blog post in 2016. This is our third  annual update (the first version can be found here). At first, we relied heavily on the work of Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado, who run blacklists of “potential, possible, or probable” predatory publishers and journals. His lists have since been removed although they live on in new form (anonymous) at the Stop predatory journals site (SPJ) and they can also be found archived. The latest effort to create a thorough blacklist comes from Cabells, who distinguish around 70 different unacceptable violations and employs a whole team reviewing journals. These lists are not, however, the final say on the matter, as it is impossible for one person or a limited group to judge reliably actors in every academic discipline. Moreover, since only questionable journals are listed, the good journals must be found elsewhere.

A response of gate keeping needs to be anchored in each discipline and the scholars who make up that discipline. As a suitable response in bioethics, we have chosen to, first, collect a few authoritative lists of recommended bioethics journals that can be consulted by anyone in bioethics to find good journals to publish with. For our first post, we recommended a list of journals ourselves, which brought on some well-deserved questions and criticism about criteria for inclusion. Unfortunately then, our list ultimately drew attention from other parts of the message that we were more concerned to get across. Besides, there are many other parties making such lists. We therefore have dropped this feature. Instead we have enlarged the collection of good journal lists to the service of our readers. They are all of great use when further exploring the reputable journals available:

• – Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Published 2011-2015  (Mark Hakkarinen, Georgetown)
• – Top 100 Bioethics Journals in the World (same author)
• – The CODEX list of journals in the field
• – List from Google Scholar
• – Key Journals in The Philosopher’s Index
• – Core Bioethics Journals in PubMed (Georgetown)

It is of prime importance to list the journals that are potentially or possibly predatory or of such a low quality that it might be dishonoring to engage with them. We have listed all 50 of them alphabetically (eleven new entries for 2019, two have ceased operation and been removed), and provided both the homepage URL and links to any professional discussion of these journals that we have found (which most often alerted us to their existence in the first place).

Each of these journals asks scholars for manuscripts from, or claims to publish papers in bioethics or related areas (such as practical philosophy). They have been reviewed by the authors of this blog post as well as by a group of reference scholars that we have asked for advice on the list. Those journals listed have unanimously been agreed are journals that – in light of the criticism put forth and the quality we see – we would not deem acceptable for us to publish in. Typical signs as to why a journal could fall in this category, such as extensive spamming, publishing in almost any subject, or fake data being included on the website etc., are listed here:

• – 8 Ways to Identify a Questionable Open Access Journal (Chrissy Prater)
• – How to avoid predatory journals—a five point plan (Jocalyn Clark)
• – The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics (article by us, includes the 25 defining characteristics of a “predatory” journal)

We have started to more systematically evaluate the journals against the 25 defining characteristics we outlined in the article linked to above (with the help of science and technology PhD students). The results will be added when they exist.

We would love to hear about your views on this blog post, and be especially grateful for pointers to journals engaging in sloppy or bad publishing practices. The list is not meant as a check-list but as a starting point for any bioethics scholar to ponder for him- or herself where to publish.

Also, anyone thinking that a journal in our list should be given due reconsideration might post their reasons for this as a comment to the blog post or send an email to us. Journals might start out with some sloppy practices but shape up over time and we will be happy to hear about it. You can make an appeal against the inclusion of a journal and we will deal with it promptly and publicly.

Please spread the content of this blog as much as you can and check back for updates (we will do a major update annually and continually add any further information found).

WHERE NOT TO PUBLISH IN BIOETHICS – THE 2019 LIST

• Advance Humanities and Social Sciences (Consortium Publisher)
  Critical remark (2018): Behind this journal you’ll find OMICS, the most-ever discussed publisher of this kind, see http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/predatory-publisher-expanding-empire-in-canada. The only article published in 2016 is very badly edited, all the references are lost in the text and the paper would not pass an exam at our departments.  2017 volume is again only one article. The publisher is listed on SPJ.
• Advances In Medical Ethics  (Longdom Publishing)
  Critical remark (2019): When asked, one editor attest to the fact that his editorship was forged. Publisher was on Beall’s list. A thorough review December 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 7 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• American Open Ethics Journal (Research and Knowledge Publication)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed on Cabells with 7 violations. A thorough review February 2020 concludes that it exhibits at least 11 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Annals of Bioethics & Clinical Applications (Medwin Publishers)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark: Publisher was on Beall’s list and is on many other lists of these journals. They say that they are “accepting all type of original works that is related to the disciplines of the journal” and indeed the flow chart of manuscript handling does not have a reject route. Indexed by alternative indexes.
• Austin Journal of Genetics and Genomic Research (Austin Publishing Group)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2 │Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2017): Spam e-mail about special issue on bioethics; Listed by SPJ; Romanian editorial member is said to be from a university in “Europe”; Another editorial board member is just called “Michael”; APG has been sued by International Association for Dental Research and The American Association of Neurological Surgeons for infringing on their IP rights. Student reviews concludes the journal is not suitable to publish in, one finding that the journal exhibits at least 16 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 10 violations.
• British Open Journal of Ethics (British Open Research Publications)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 6 violations.
• Creative Education (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; They claim misleadingly to be indexed by ISI but this relates to be among cited articles only – they are not indexed. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 5 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• East European Scientific Journal (East European Research Alliance)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Criticised by Beall for having a bogus editorial board; Claims to be indexed by ISI but that is not the well-known Institute for Scientific Information (now Thompson Reuters), but rather the so-called International Scientific Indexing. Thorough reviews November 2018 and February 2019  conclude that it exhibits at least 13 or 14 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Ethics Today Journal (Franklin Publishing)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 9 violations.
• European Academic Research (Kogaion Publishing Center, formerly Bridge Center)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses impact factor from Universal Impact Factor (now defunct); A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Use of alternative indexes. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Impact factor given by  Global Impact Factor. A thorough review March 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 10 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Contemporary Research & Review
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Indexed by Index Copernicus; Despite claims they seem not to be indexed by either Chemical Abstracts or DOAJ. A thorough review June 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Current Research
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses IF from SJIF and Index Copernicus and more. It wrongly claims to be indexed by Thomson Reuters, ORCID and having a DOI among other things. A thorough review January 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review (Excellent Publishers)
  Critical remark (June 2018): Listed by SPJ and Cabells because of misleading claims about credentials, metrics, and too quick review; alternative indexing; publishes in almost any field imaginable; the editor -in-chief is head of the “Excellent Education and Researh Institute” (sic) which does not seem to exist even when spelled right? A thorough review in December 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory journals”.
• International Journal of Ethics & Moral Philosophy (Journal Network)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Publisher was criticized by Beall when launching 350 journals at once; After several years not one associate editor has signed up and no article has been published; No editorial or contact details available. Thorough reviews in May 2019 and February 2020 conclude that it exhibits at least 10 to 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory journals”.
• International Journal of Ethics in Engineering & Management Education
  Critical remark (2019): Papers from almost any field; Claims to have a 5.4 Impact factor (from IJEEE); Indexed by GJIF etc. A non-existent address in “Varginia”, US (sic!); Open access but asks for the copyright; Claims to be indexed in Scopus can’t be verified. Thorough reviews February 2018 and February 2020 conclude that it exhibits at least 16-17 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals. Listed by Cabells with 11 violations found.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (Centre for Promoting Ideas)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
  Critical remark (2019): The chief editor listed in April 2014  is a deceased person (2018). A thorough review in April 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention
  Criticism 
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ and is on many other lists of blacklisted journals; An IF of 4.5 given by African Quality Centre for Journals; Open access but asks for the copyright; Publishes any subject; Says that the journal is indexed in DOAJ which it does not seem to be. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ and Cabells; Claims an IF of 5.22 (by “Research Journal Impact Factor“); Despite title from India; Alternative indexing; Thorough reviews in February 2018 and February 2020 conclude that it exhibits at least 10-13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Has an amazing fast-track review option for $100 that guarantees “the review, editorial decision, author notification and publication” to take place “within 2 weeks”. “Editors” claim that repeated requests to be removed from the list of editors result in nothing. Thorough reviews in  February and June 2018 conclude that it seems to exhibit at least 7 to 10 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; IF from International Impact Factor Services; States that there “is no scope of correction after the paper publication”.
  Critical remark (2018): They write that the “review process will be completed expectedly within 3-4 days”.
• International Journal of Philosophy (SciencePG)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Alternative indexing and also IF from Universal Impact Factor (now defunct); Promises a two-week peer review. Thorough reviews in April and November 2018 conclude that it seems to exhibit at least 10 or 8 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals and also find obvious examples of pseudo-science among the published articles.
• International Journal of Philosophy and Theology (American Research Institute for Policy Development)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark: A thorough review in June 2018 concludes that “there are grounds to believe that the American Research Institute never intended to create a serious scientific periodical and that, on the contrary, its publications are out-and-out predatory journals.”
• International Journal of Public Health and Human Rights (Bioinfo Publications)
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On many other blacklists and IF from Index Copernicus.
• International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Open access but asks for the copyright. A thorough review in April 2018 concludes that it seems to exhibit at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (Research Publish Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On their homepage they state that in order to get a high IF their journals are “indexed in top class organisation around the world” although no major index is used.
• International Open Journal of Philosophy (Academic and Scientific Publishing)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and was heavily critized on Beall’s blog; The editorial board consists of one person from Iran; Although boosting 12 issues a year they have published only 1 article in the journal’s first four years; A thorough review March 1 2017 concludes that it exhibits 17 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals and one in March 2019 that it exhibits at least 13 criteria.
• International Researchers
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Indexed by e.g. Index Copernicus; Claims that it is “Monitor by Thomson Reuters” but is not part of the TR journal citation reports; Several pages are not working at time of review; A thorough review April 24 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 6 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Internet Journal of Law, Healthcare and Ethics (ISPUB)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Formerly on Beall’s list.
• Jacobs Journal of Clinical Trials
  Critical remark (2018): Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Ethical Issues in Health Care Research’. Have been severely criticized here and also in this scholarly article. Publisher listed on SPJ. A randomly chosen article from issue 1 is markedly flawed in execution.
  Critical remark (2019): Web page is presently down when trying to access.
• Journal of Academic and Business Ethics (Academic and Business Research Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as several other blacklists; Journal seems uncertain about it’s own name, the header curiously says “Journal of ethical and legal issues”.
• Journal of Bioethics and Applications (Sci Forschen)
  Critical remark (2018): Brand new journal with no articles yet. Publisher has been criticized for spamming more than once, have a bad record at Scam Analyze, and is listed on SPJ.
• Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics (OMICS)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4 │ Criticism 5 │ Criticism 6
  Critical remark (2017): This publisher is listed on SPJ and was taken to court for possible fraud by the Federal Trade Commission in the US (and lost). They are listed by Cabells for 8 violations.
• Journal of International Ethical Theory and Practice (MedCrave)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4 │ Criticism 5 │ Criticism 6 │ Criticism 7
  Critical remark (May 2018): New journal with no articles or issues yet – but still is in need of so many editors that spam emails are sent. They kindly allow for scientific articles: “The research articles can include the findings and the methodology you used.” MedCrave uses many alternative indexing services. They are listed by SPJ. They also spam the Internet with claims for all criticism to be a hoax or fake news.
  Update 2019: Have ceased operations, apparently.
• Journal of Law and Ethics
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Claims to be on Ulrichs but is not; Claims to be in the Norwegian list and can actually be found there but under its former name (4 years earlier) and with 0 points.
  Update 2019: Seems to have moved to here. Security warnings and denied access makes it impossible to check whether it is the same journal or another one.
• Journal of Philosophy and Ethics (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critical remark (2019): listed by Cabells for 7 violations.
• Journal of Research in Philosophy and History (Scholink)
  Criticism 1 │
  Critical remark (June 2018): Listed on several lists of predatory publishers. They only do “peer review” through their own editorial board, a flowchart states. They claim to check for plagiarism but the first 2018 article abstract run by us through a checker turned out to be self-plagiarized from a book and it looks to have been published many times over. Unfortunately, the next paper checked in the same issue was also published the previous year by another journal listed here…
• Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (AASCIT)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2019): From law to religion, this journal publishes it all. Though publisher claims to be “American”, it has only two editors, both from India. The list from Cabells includes 13 journals from this publisher. The AASCIT Code of Ethics apparently plagiarizes the INCOSE Code of Ethics.
• Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Alternative indexing; Uses several alternative IF providers. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• JSM Health Education and Primary Health Care
  Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Bioethics’. The publisher is listed on SPJ,  and criticized and exposed here. It is indexed by spoof indexer Directory of Research Journals Indexing among others (whose website is now gone, BTW).
  Update 2019: Access denied because of non-secure connection.
• Medical Ethics and Communication (Avid Science)
  Criticism
  Critical remarks (2017): Listed on SPJ; Spamming researchers with offer of eBook publication for $350.
• Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2018): This publisher was on Beall’s list; Uses alternative impact factors and indexing; Publishes in less than 30 days; Curiously, it says no fee is charged for publication.
  Update 2019: Web pass alert on entering the site.
• Open Journal of Philosophy (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │
• Philosophical Papers and Review (Academic Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and blacklisted by the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia; Although it claims to be a peer-review journal, it states that manuscripts “are reviewed by editorial board members or other qualified persons”.
• Philosophy Study  (David Publishing Company)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ. A thorough review October 2019 concludes that it exhibits approx. 8 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• The Recent Advances in Academic Science Journal (Swedish Scientific Publications)
  Critical remark (2018): Despite the publisher’s name it seems based in India. The only Swedish editor’s existence cannot be verified. Website quality is lacking. Listed on SPJ. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Universal Open Ethics Journal (Adyan Academic Press)
  Critical remark (2019): listed by Cabells for 7 violations.
• World Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (Science and Education Publishing, SciEP)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as many other blacklists. A thorough review may 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 7 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.

Update 1: International Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues (Jacobs Publishers)
Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
Critical remark (2019): Spamming with invitation to publish. They are unsure of their own name; in the e-mail they call the journal “International Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Affairs“! Publisher listed on SPJ. Editor-in-chief and editorial board are missing. Claims that material is “written by leading scholars” which is obviously false.

End remark:

In light of recent legal action taken against people trying to warn others about dubious publishers and journals – see here and here, for example – we want to stress that this blog post is about where we would like our articles to show up, it is about quality, and as such it is an expression of a professional judgement intended to help authors find good journals with which to publish. Indirectly, this may also help readers to be more discerning about the articles they read. As such it is no different from other rankings that can be found for various products and services everywhere. Our list of where not to publish implies no accusation of deception or fraud but claims to identify journals that experienced bioethicists would usually not find to be of high quality. Those criticisms linked to might be more upfront or confrontational; us linking to them does not imply an endorsement of any objectionable statement made therein. We would also like to point out that individual papers published in these journals might of course nevertheless be perfectly acceptable contributions to the scholarly literature of bioethics.

Stefan Eriksson & Gert Helgesson

Read more about Stefan’s work at CRB here

Essential resources on so-called predatory publishing and open access:

• Open access – the rise and fall of a community-driven model of scientific communication, by J Schöpfel.
• Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences, by John D Bowman.
• Inside a “Fake” Conference: A Journey Into Predatory Science, by Ruairi J Mackenzie
• ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics, by Cenyu Shen and Bo-Christer Björk.
• Spurious alternative impact factors: The scale of the problem from an academic perspective, by Gutierrez et al.
• The Writing Style of Predatory Publishers, by Markowitz et al.
• Time to stop talking about ‘predatory journals’, by Eriksson & Helgesson.

• The Rise of Junk Science. Fake publications are corrupting the world of research —and influencing real news (the latest developments presented in 2019 by Alex Gillis)

• Why Open Research, a nice site advocating open access publishing for research.

Update: The 2019 list is now available!

Allegedly, there are over 12.000 so called predatory journals out there. Instead of supporting readers and science, these journals serve their own economic interests first and at best offer dubious merits for scholars. We believe that scholars working in any academic discipline have a professional interest and a responsibility to keep track of these journals. It is our job to warn the young or inexperienced of journals where a publication or editorship could be detrimental to their career and science is not served. We have seen “predatory” publishing take off in a big way and noticed how colleagues start to turn up in the pages of some of these journals. While many have assumed that this phenomenon mainly is a problem for low status universities, there are strong indications that predatory publishing is a part of a major trend towards the industrialization of misconduct and that it affects many top-flight research institutions (see Priyanka Pulla: “In India, elite institutes in shady journals”, Science 354(6319): 1511-1512). This trend, referred to by some as the dark side of publishing, needs to be reversed.

Thus we published this blog post in 2016. This is our third  annual update (the first version can be found here). At first, we relied heavily on the work of Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado, who run blacklists of “potential, possible, or probable” predatory publishers and journals. His lists have since been removed although they live on in new form (anonymous) at the Stop predatory journals site (SPJ) and they can also be found archived. The latest effort to create a thorough blacklist comes from Cabells, who distinguish around 70 different unacceptable violations and employs a whole team reviewing journals. These lists are not, however, the final say on the matter, as it is impossible for one person or a limited group to judge reliably actors in every academic discipline. Moreover, since only questionable journals are listed, the good journals must be found elsewhere.

A response of gate keeping needs to be anchored in each discipline and the scholars who make up that discipline. As a suitable response in bioethics, we have chosen to, first, collect a few authoritative lists of recommended bioethics journals that can be consulted by anyone in bioethics to find good journals to publish with. For our first post, we recommended a list of journals ourselves, which brought on some well-deserved questions and criticism about criteria for inclusion. Unfortunately then, our list ultimately drew attention from other parts of the message that we were more concerned to get across. Besides, there are many other parties making such lists. We therefore have dropped this feature. Instead we have enlarged the collection of good journal lists to the service of our readers. They are all of great use when further exploring the reputable journals available:

• – Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Published 2011-2015  (Mark Hakkarinen, Georgetown)
• – Top 100 Bioethics Journals in the World (same author)
• – The CODEX list of journals in the field
• – List from Google Scholar
• – Key Journals in The Philosopher’s Index
• – Core Bioethics Journals in PubMed (Georgetown)

It is of prime importance to list the journals that are potentially or possibly predatory or of such a low quality that it might be dishonoring to engage with them. We have listed all 50 of them alphabetically (eleven new entries for 2019, two have ceased operation and been removed), and provided both the homepage URL and links to any professional discussion of these journals that we have found (which most often alerted us to their existence in the first place).

Each of these journals asks scholars for manuscripts from, or claims to publish papers in bioethics or related areas (such as practical philosophy). They have been reviewed by the authors of this blog post as well as by a group of reference scholars that we have asked for advice on the list. Those journals listed have unanimously been agreed are journals that – in light of the criticism put forth and the quality we see – we would not deem acceptable for us to publish in. Typical signs as to why a journal could fall in this category, such as extensive spamming, publishing in almost any subject, or fake data being included on the website etc., are listed here:

• – 8 Ways to Identify a Questionable Open Access Journal (Chrissy Prater)
• – How to avoid predatory journals—a five point plan (Jocalyn Clark)
• – The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics (article by us, includes the 25 defining characteristics of a “predatory” journal)

We have started to more systematically evaluate the journals against the 25 defining characteristics we outlined in the article linked to above (with the help of science and technology PhD students). The results will be added when they exist.

We would love to hear about your views on this blog post, and be especially grateful for pointers to journals engaging in sloppy or bad publishing practices. The list is not meant as a check-list but as a starting point for any bioethics scholar to ponder for him- or herself where to publish.

Also, anyone thinking that a journal in our list should be given due reconsideration might post their reasons for this as a comment to the blog post or send an email to us. Journals might start out with some sloppy practices but shape up over time and we will be happy to hear about it. You can make an appeal against the inclusion of a journal and we will deal with it promptly and publicly.

Please spread the content of this blog as much as you can and check back for updates (we will do a major update annually and continually add any further information found).

WHERE NOT TO PUBLISH IN BIOETHICS – THE 2019 LIST

• Advance Humanities and Social Sciences (Consortium Publisher)
  Critical remark (2018): Behind this journal you’ll find OMICS, the most-ever discussed publisher of this kind, see http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/predatory-publisher-expanding-empire-in-canada. The only article published in 2016 is very badly edited, all the references are lost in the text and the paper would not pass an exam at our departments.  2017 volume is again only one article. The publisher is listed on SPJ.
• Advances In Medical Ethics  (Longdom Publishing)
  Critical remark (2019): When asked, one editor attest to the fact that his editorship was forged. Publisher was on Beall’s list.
• American Open Ethics Journal (Research and Knowledge Publication)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed on Cabells with 7 violations.
• Annals of Bioethics & Clinical Applications (Medwin Publishers)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark: Publisher was on Beall’s list and is on many other lists of these journals. They say that they are “accepting all type of original works that is related to the disciplines of the journal” and indeed the flow chart of manuscript handling does not have a reject route. Indexed by alternative indexes.
• Austin Journal of Genetics and Genomic Research (Austin Publishing Group)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2 │Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2017): Spam e-mail about special issue on bioethics; Listed by SPJ; Romanian editorial member is said to be from a university in “Europe”; Another editorial board member is just called “Michael”; APG has been sued by International Association for Dental Research and The American Association of Neurological Surgeons for infringing on their IP rights. Student review concludes the journal is not suitable to publish in.
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 10 violations.
• British Open Journal of Ethics (British Open Research Publications)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 6 violations.
• Creative Education (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; They claim misleadingly to be indexed by ISI but this relates to be among cited articles only – they are not indexed. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 5 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• East European Scientific Journal (East European Research Alliance)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Criticised by Beall for having a bogus editorial board; Claims to be indexed by ISI but that is not the well-known Institute for Scientific Information (now Thompson Reuters), but rather the so-called International Scientific Indexing. Thorough reviews November 2018 and February 2019  conclude that it exhibits at least 13 or 14 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Ethics Today Journal (Franklin Publishing)
  Critical remark (2019): Listed by Cabells with 9 violations.
• European Academic Research (Kogaion Publishing Center, formerly Bridge Center)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses impact factor from Universal Impact Factor (now defunct); A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Use of alternative indexes. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Impact factor given by  Global Impact Factor. A thorough review March 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 10 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Contemporary Research & Review
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Indexed by Index Copernicus; Despite claims they seem not to be indexed by either Chemical Abstracts or DOAJ. A thorough review June 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Current Research
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses IF from SJIF and Index Copernicus and more. It wrongly claims to be indexed by Thomson Reuters, ORCID and having a DOI among other things. A thorough review January 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review (Excellent Publishers)
  Critical remark (June 2018): Listed by SPJ and Cabells because of misleading claims about credentials, metrics, and too quick review; alternative indexing; publishes in almost any field imaginable; the editor -in-chief is head of the “Excellent Education and Researh Institute” (sic) which does not seem to exist even when spelled right?
• International Journal of Ethics & Moral Philosophy (Journal Network)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Publisher was criticized by Beall when launching 350 journals at once; After several years not one associate editor has signed up and no article has been published; No editorial or contact details available. A thorough review in May 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory journals”.
• International Journal of Ethics in Engineering & Management Education
  Critical remark (2019): Papers from almost any field; Claims to have a 5.4 Impact factor (from IJEEE); Indexed by GJIF etc. A non-existent address in “Varginia”, US (sic!); Open access but asks for the copyright; Claims to be indexed in Scopus can’t be verified. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 16 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals. Listed by Cabells with 11 violations found.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (Centre for Promoting Ideas)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
  Critical remark (2019): The chief editor listed in April 2014  is a deceased person (2018). A thorough review in April 2019 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention
  Criticism 
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ and is on many other lists of blacklisted journals; An IF of 4.5 given by African Quality Centre for Journals; Open access but asks for the copyright; Publishes any subject; Says that the journal is indexed in DOAJ which it does not seem to be. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Claims an IF of 5.22 (by “Research Journal Impact Factor“); Despite title from India; Alternative indexing; A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Has an amazing fast-track review option for $100 that guarantees “the review, editorial decision, author notification and publication” to take place “within 2 weeks”. “Editors” claim that repeated requests to be removed from the list of editors result in nothing. Thorough reviews in  February and June 2018 conclude that it seems to exhibit at least 7 to 10 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; IF from International Impact Factor Services; States that there “is no scope of correction after the paper publication”.
  Critical remark (2018): They write that the “review process will be completed expectedly within 3-4 days”.
• International Journal of Philosophy (SciencePG)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Alternative indexing and also IF from Universal Impact Factor (now defunct); Promises a two-week peer review. Thorough reviews in April and November 2018 conclude that it seems to exhibit at least 10 or 8 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals and also find obvious examples of pseudo-science among the published articles.
• International Journal of Philosophy and Theology (American Research Institute for Policy Development)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark: A thorough review in June 2018 concludes that “there are grounds to believe that the American Research Institute never intended to create a serious scientific periodical and that, on the contrary, its publications are out-and-out predatory journals.”
• International Journal of Public Health and Human Rights (Bioinfo Publications)
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On many other blacklists and IF from Index Copernicus.
• International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Open access but asks for the copyright. A thorough review in April 2018 concludes that it seems to exhibit at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (Research Publish Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On their homepage they state that in order to get a high IF their journals are “indexed in top class organisation around the world” although no major index is used.
• International Open Journal of Philosophy (Academic and Scientific Publishing)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and was heavily critized on Beall’s blog; The editorial board consists of one person from Iran; Although boosting 12 issues a year they have published only 1 article in the journal’s first four years; A thorough review March 1 2017 concludes that it exhibits 17 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals and one in March 2019 that it exhibits at least 13 criteria.
• International Researchers
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Indexed by e.g. Index Copernicus; Claims that it is “Monitor by Thomson Reuters” but is not part of the TR journal citation reports; Several pages are not working at time of review; A thorough review April 24 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 6 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Internet Journal of Law, Healthcare and Ethics (ISPUB)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Formerly on Beall’s list.
• Jacobs Journal of Clinical Trials
  Critical remark (2018): Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Ethical Issues in Health Care Research’. Have been severely criticized here and also in this scholarly article. Publisher listed on SPJ. A randomly chosen article from issue 1 is markedly flawed in execution.
  Critical remark (2019): Web page is presently down when trying to access.
• Journal of Academic and Business Ethics (Academic and Business Research Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as several other blacklists; Journal seems uncertain about it’s own name, the header curiously says “Journal of ethical and legal issues”.
• Journal of Bioethics and Applications (Sci Forschen)
  Critical remark (2018): Brand new journal with no articles yet. Publisher has been criticized for spamming more than once, have a bad record at Scam Analyze, and is listed on SPJ.
• Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics (OMICS)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4 │ Criticism 5 │ Criticism 6
  Critical remark (2017): This publisher is listed on SPJ and was taken to court for possible fraud by the Federal Trade Commission in the US (and lost). They are listed by Cabells for 8 violations.
• Journal of International Ethical Theory and Practice (MedCrave)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4 │ Criticism 5 │ Criticism 6 │ Criticism 7
  Critical remark (May 2018): New journal with no articles or issues yet – but still is in need of so many editors that spam emails are sent. They kindly allow for scientific articles: “The research articles can include the findings and the methodology you used.” MedCrave uses many alternative indexing services. They are listed by SPJ. They also spam the Internet with claims for all criticism to be a hoax or fake news.
  Update 2019: Have ceased operations, apparently.
• Journal of Law and Ethics
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Claims to be on Ulrichs but is not; Claims to be in the Norwegian list and can actually be found there but under its former name (4 years earlier) and with 0 points.
  Update 2019: Seems to have moved to here. Security warnings and denied access makes it impossible to check whether it is the same journal or another one.
• Journal of Philosophy and Ethics (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critical remark (2019): listed by Cabells for 7 violations.
• Journal of Research in Philosophy and History (Scholink)
  Criticism 1 │
  Critical remark (June 2018): Listed on several lists of predatory publishers. They only do “peer review” through their own editorial board, a flowchart states. They claim to check for plagiarism but the first 2018 article abstract run by us through a checker turned out to be self-plagiarized from a book and it looks to have been published many times over. Unfortunately, the next paper checked in the same issue was also published the previous year by another journal listed here…
• Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (AASCIT)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2019): From law to religion, this journal publishes it all. Though publisher claims to be “American”, it has only two editors, both from India. The list from Cabells includes 13 journals from this publisher. The AASCIT Code of Ethics apparently plagiarizes the INCOSE Code of Ethics.
• Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Alternative indexing; Uses several alternative IF providers. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• JSM Health Education and Primary Health Care
  Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Bioethics’. The publisher is listed on SPJ,  and criticized and exposed here. It is indexed by spoof indexer Directory of Research Journals Indexing among others (whose website is now gone, BTW).
  Update 2019: Access denied because of non-secure connection.
• Medical Ethics and Communication (Avid Science)
  Criticism
  Critical remarks (2017): Listed on SPJ; Spamming researchers with offer of eBook publication for $350.
• Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2018): This publisher was on Beall’s list; Uses alternative impact factors and indexing; Publishes in less than 30 days; Curiously, it says no fee is charged for publication.
  Update 2019: Web pass alert on entering the site.
• Open Journal of Philosophy (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │
• Philosophical Papers and Review (Academic Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and blacklisted by the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia; Although it claims to be a peer-review journal, it states that manuscripts “are reviewed by editorial board members or other qualified persons”.
• Philosophy Study  (David Publishing Company)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ.
• The Recent Advances in Academic Science Journal (Swedish Scientific Publications)
  Critical remark (2018): Despite the publisher’s name it seems based in India. The only Swedish editor’s existence cannot be verified. Website quality is lacking. Listed on SPJ. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Universal Open Ethics Journal (Adyan Academic Press)
  Critical remark (2019): listed by Cabells for 7 violations.
• World Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (Science and Education Publishing, SciEP)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as many other blacklists.

End remark:

In light of recent legal action taken against people trying to warn others about dubious publishers and journals – see here and here, for example – we want to stress that this blog post is about where we would like our articles to show up, it is about quality, and as such it is an expression of a professional judgement intended to help authors find good journals with which to publish. Indirectly, this may also help readers to be more discerning about the articles they read. As such it is no different from other rankings that can be found for various products and services everywhere. Our list of where not to publish implies no accusation of deception or fraud but claims to identify journals that experienced bioethicists would usually not find to be of high quality. Those criticisms linked to might be more upfront or confrontational; us linking to them does not imply an endorsement of any objectionable statement made therein. We would also like to point out that individual papers published in these journals might of course nevertheless be perfectly acceptable contributions to the scholarly literature of bioethics.

Stefan Eriksson & Gert Helgesson

Read more about Stefan’s work at CRB here

Essential resources on so-called predatory publishing and open access:

• Open access – the rise and fall of a community-driven model of scientific communication, by J Schöpfel.
• Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences, by John D Bowman.
• Predatory and Fake Scientific Journals/Publishers – A Global Outbreak with Rising Trend: A Review, by Tin et al.
• Rise of the predators: Business is booming in the murky global market of suspect and sham publishers and journals, by Bryn Nelson.
• ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics, by Cenyu Shen and Bo-Christer Björk.
• Spurious alternative impact factors: The scale of the problem from an academic perspective, by Gutierrez et al.
• The Writing Style of Predatory Publishers, by Markowitz et al.
• How should we treat those taken in by predatory journals?, by Dalmeet Singh Chawla.
• Time to stop talking about ‘predatory journals’, by Eriksson & Helgesson.

• All publishers are predatory – some are bigger than others, by Olavo B. Amaral

• Why Open Research, a nice site advocating open access publishing for research

This blog has been updated! Click to see the new 2018 list!

Allegedly, there are over 8.000 so called predatory journals out there. Instead of supporting readers and science, these journals serve their own economic interests first and at best offer dubious merits for scholars. We believe that scholars working in any academic discipline have a professional interest and a responsibility to keep track of these journals. It is our job to warn the young or inexperienced of journals where a publication or editorship could be detrimental to their career and science is not served. We have seen “predatory” publishing take off in a big way and noticed how colleagues start to turn up in the pages of some of these journals. While many have assumed that this phenomenon mainly is a problem for low status universities, there are strong indications that predatory publishing is a part of a major trend towards the industrialization of misconduct and that it affects many top-flight research institutions (see Priyanka Pulla: “In India, elite institutes in shady journals”, Science 354(6319): 1511-1512). This trend, referred to by some as the dark side of publishing, needs to be reversed.

Thus we published this blog post in 2016. This is our first annual update (the previous version can be found here). At first, we relied heavily on the work of Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado, who runs blacklists of “potential, possible, or probable” predatory publishers and journals. His lists have since been removed although they live on in new form (anonymous) at the Stop predatory journals site (SPJ) and they can also be found archived. These lists were not, however, the final say on the matter, as it is impossible for one person to judge reliably actors in every academic discipline. Moreover, since only questionable journals are listed, the good journals must be found elsewhere.

A response of gatekeeping needs to be anchored in each discipline and the scholars who make up that discipline. As a suitable response in bioethics, we have chosen to, first, collect a few authoritative lists of recommended bioethics journals that can be consulted by anyone in bioethics to find good journals to publish with. Last year, we recommended a list of journals ourselves, which brought on some well-deserved questions and criticism about criteria for inclusion. Unfortunately then, our list ultimately drew attention from other parts of the message that we were more concerned to get across. Besides, there are many other parties making such lists. We therefore have dropped this feature. Instead we have enlarged the collection of good journal lists to the service of our readers. They are all of great use when further exploring the reputable journals available:

• – Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Published 2011-2015  (Mark Hakkarinen, Georgetown)
• – Top 100 Bioethics Journals in the World (same author)
• – The CODEX list of journals in the field
• – List from Google Scholar
• – Key Journals in The Philosopher’s Index
• – Core Bioethics Journals in PubMed (Georgetown)

It is of prime importance to list the journals that are potentially or possibly predatory or of such a low quality that it might be dishonoring to engage with them. We have listed all 36 of them (up with eleven from last year) alphabetically and provided both the homepage URL and links to any professional discussion of these journals that we have found (which most often alerted us to their existence in the first place).

Each of these journals asks scholars for manuscripts from, or claims to publish papers in bioethics or related areas (such as practical philosophy). They have been reviewed by the authors of this blog post as well as by a group of reference scholars that we have asked for advice on the list. Those journals listed have unanimously been agreed are journals that – in light of the criticism put forth and the quality we see – we would not deem acceptable for us to publish in. Typical signs as to why a journal could fall in this category, such as extensive spamming, publishing in almost any subject, or fake data being included on the website etc., are listed here:

• – 8 Ways to Identify a Questionable Open Access Journal (Chrissy Prater)
• – How to avoid predatory journals—a five point plan (Jocalyn Clark)
• – Identifying and avoiding predatory publishers: a primer for researchers (Canadian Assoc. of Research Libraries)
• – The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics (article by us, includes the 25 defining characteristics of a “predatory” journal)

We have started to more systematically evaluate the journals against the 25 defining characteristics we outlined in the article linked to above (with the help of science and technology PhD students). The results will be added when they exist.

We would love to hear about your views on this blog post, and be especially grateful for pointers to journals engaging in sloppy or bad publishing practices. The list is not meant as a check-list but as a starting point for any bioethics scholar to ponder for him- or herself where to publish.

Also, anyone thinking that a journal in our list should be given due reconsideration might post their reasons for this as a comment to the blog post or send an email to us. Journals might start out with some sloppy practices but shape up over time and we will be happy to hear about it. You can make an appeal against the inclusion of a journal and we will deal with it promptly and publicly.

Please spread the content of this blog as much as you can and check back for updates (we will do a major update annually and continually add any further information found).

WHERE NOT TO PUBLISH IN BIOETHICS – THE 2017 LIST

• American Research Thoughts (Kogaion Publishing Center)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ (i.e. Stop predatory journals); Title and payment in US$ although published in Romania; No articles found on site; Some pages are not working; Unofficial impact factor displayed.
•  Austin Journal of Genetics and Genomic Research (Austin Publishing Group)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2 │Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2017): Spam e-mail about special issue on bioethics; Listed by SPJ; Romanian editorial member is said to be from a university in “Europe”; Another editorial board member is just called “Michael”; APG has been sued by International Association for Dental Research and The American Association of Neurological Surgeons for infringing on their IP rights. Student review concludes the journal is not suitable to publish in.
• Creative Education (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; They claim misleadingly to be indexed by ISI but this relates to be among cited articles only – they are not indexed. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 5 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• East European Scientific Journal (East European Research Alliance)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Criticised by Beall for having a bogus editorial board; Claims to be indexed by ISI but that is not the well-known Institute for Scientific Information (now Thompson Reuters), but rather the so-called International Scientific Indexing.
• European Academic Research (Kogaion Publishing Center, formerly Bridge Center)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses impact factor from Universal Impact Factor; A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Use of alternative indexes. A thorough review May 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Impact factor was last year given by “International Services for Impact Factor & Indexing” which now seems to have ceased operations.
• International Journal of Contemporary Research & Review
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Indexed by Index Copernicus; Despite claims they seem not to be indexed by either Chemical Abstracts or DOAJ. A thorough review June 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Current Research
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Uses IF from SJIF and Index Copernicus and more. It wrongly claims to be indexed by Thomson Reuters, ORCID and having a DOI among other things. A thorough review January 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 12 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Ethics & Moral Philosophy (Journal Network)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Publisher was criticised by Beall when launcing 350 journals at once; After a year not one associate editor has signed up and no article has been published; No editorial or contact details available.
• International Journal of Ethics in Engineering & Management Education
  Critical remark (2017): Papers from almost any field; Claims to have a 5.4 Impact factor (from UJIF); Indexed by GJIF and Cosmos; A non-existent address in “Varginia”, US (sic!); Open access but asks for the copyright; Claims to be indexed in Scopus can’t be verified. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 16 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (Centre for Promoting Ideas)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention
  Criticism 
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ and is on many other lists of blacklisted journals; An IF of 4.5 given by African Quality Centre for Journals; Open access but asks for the copyright; Publishes any subject; Says that the journal is indexed in DOAJ which it does not seem to be. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Claims an IF of 5.22 (by “Research Journal Impact Factor“); Despite title from India; Says that the journal is indexed in DOAJ which it does not seem to be. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it exhibits at least 13 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Has an amazing fast-track review option for $100 that guarantees “the review, editorial decision, author notification and publication” to take place “within 2 weeks”. “Editors” claim that repeated requests to be removed from the list of editors result in nothing. A thorough review February 2018 concludes that it seems to exhibit at least 10 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; IF from International Impact Factor Services; States that there “is no scope of correction after the paper publication”.
  
• International Journal of Philosophy (SciencePG)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed by SPJ; Alternative indexing and also IF from Universal Impact Factor; Promises a two-week peer review.
• International Journal of Philosophy and Theology (American Research Institute for Policy Development)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
• International Journal of Public Health and Human Rights (Bioinfo Publications)
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On many other blacklists and IF from Index Copernicus.
• International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Open access but asks for the copyright.
• International Journal of Science Social Studies Humanities and Management (Brainy Buzz)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; This “international journal” is run by three editors from India; A fast-track review for $50 guarantees “the review, editorial decision, and author notification” on the manuscript “to take place within 5 working Days”; Publishes any subject.
• International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (Research Publish Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; On their homepage they state that in order to get a high IF their journals are “indexed in top class organisation around the world” although no major index is used.
• International Open Journal of Philosophy (Academic and Scientific Publishing)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and was heavily critized on Beall’s blog; The editorial board consists of one person from Iran; Although boosting 12 issues a year they have published only 1 article in the journal’s first four years; A thorough review March 1 2017 concludes that it exhibits 17 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• International Researchers
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Indexed by e.g. Index Copernicus; Claims that it is “Monitor by Thomson Reuters” but is not part of the TR journal citation reports; Several pages are not working at time of review; A thorough review April 24 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 6 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Internet Journal of Law, Healthcare and Ethics (ISPUB)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Formerly on Beall’s list.
• Journal of Academic and Business Ethics (Academic and Business Research Institute)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as several other blacklists; Journal seems uncertain about it’s own name, the header curiously says “Journal of ethical and legal issues”.
• Journal of Advances in Philosophy (Council for Innovative Research)
  Remark (2017): Seems to have ceased operations.
• Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics (OMICS)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4 │ Criticism 5 │ Criticism 6
  Critical remark (2017): This publisher is listed on SPJ and was taken to court for possible fraud by the Federal Trade Commission in the US.
• Journal of Law and Ethics
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Claims to be on Ulrichs but is not; Claims to be in the Norwegian list and can actually be found there but under its former name (4 years earlier) and with 0 points.
• Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ; Alternative indexing; Uses several alternative IF providers. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 9 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.
• Medical Ethics and Communication (Avid Science)
  Criticism
  Critical remarks (2017): Listed on SPJ; Spamming researchers with offer of eBook publication for $350.
• Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
  Criticism
  Critical remark (2017): This publisher was on Beall’s list; Uses alternative impact factors; Publishes in less than four weeks; Curiously, it says no fee is charged for publication.
• Open Journal of Philosophy (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
• Philosophical Papers and Review (Academic Journals)
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ and blacklisted by the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia; Although it claims to be a peer-review journal, it states that manuscripts “are reviewed by editorial board members or other qualified persons”.
• Philosophy Study (David Publishing Company)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ.
• World Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (Science and Education Publishing, SciEP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
  Critical remark (2017): Listed on SPJ as well as many other blacklists.

UPDATE! New journal added: Advance Humanities and Social Sciences (Consortium Publisher). Behind this journal you’ll find OMICS, the most-ever discussed publisher of this kind, see http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/predatory-publisher-expanding-empire-in-canada. The only article published in 2016 is very badly edited, all the references are lost in the text and the paper would not pass an exam at our departments. The publisher is listed on SPJ.

UPDATE II: New journal added: The Recent Advances in Academic Science Journal (Swedish Scientific Publications). Despite the name it seems based in India. The only Swedish editor’s existence cannot be verified. Website quality is lacking. Listed on SPJ. A thorough review October 2017 concludes that it exhibits at least 15 of the 25 criteria for “predatory” journals.

UPDATE III: New journal added: Journal of Bioethics and Applications (Sci Forschen). Brand new journal with no articles yet. Publisher has been criticized for spamming more than once, have a bad record at Scam Analyze, and is listed on SPJ.

UPDATE IV: New journal added: Jacobs Journal of Clinical Trials. Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Ethical Issues in Health Care Research’. Have been severely criticized here and also in this scholarly article. Publisher listed on SPJ. A randomly chosen article from issue 1 is markedly flawed in execution.

UPDATE V: New journal added: JSM Health Education and Primary Health Care.  Spamming with invitation to special issue on ‘Bioethics’. The publisher is listed on SPJ,  and criticized and exposed here. It is indexed by spoof indexer Directory of Research Journals Indexing among others (whose website is now gone, BTW).

In light of recent legal action taken against people trying to warn others about dubious publishers and journals – see here and here – we want to stress that this blog post is about where we would like our articles to show up, it is about quality, and as such it is an expression of a professional judgement intended to help authors find good journals with which to publish. Indirectly, this may also help readers to be more discerning about the articles they read. As such it is no different from other rankings that can be found for various products and services everywhere. Our list of where not to publish implies no accusation of deception or fraud but claims to identify journals that experienced bioethicists would usually not find to be of high quality. Those criticisms linked to might be more upfront or confrontational; us linking to them does not imply an endorsement of any objectionable statement made therein. We would also like to point out that individual papers published in these journals might of course nevertheless be perfectly acceptable contributions to the scholarly literature of bioethics.

Stefan Eriksson & Gert Helgesson

Read more about Stefan’s work at CRB here

Essential resources on so-called predatory publishing and open access:

• Open access – the rise and fall of a community-driven model of scientific communication, by J Schöpfel.
• Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences, by John D Bowman.
• Predatory and Fake Scientific Journals/Publishers – A Global Outbreak with Rising Trend: A Review, by Tin et al.
• Rise of the predators: Business is booming in the murky global market of suspect and sham publishers and journals, by Bryn Nelson.
• ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics, by Cenyu Shen and Bo-Christer Björk.
• Spurious alternative impact factors: The scale of the problem from an academic perspective, by Gutierrez et al.
• The Writing Style of Predatory Publishers, by Markowitz et al.
• How should we treat those taken in by predatory journals?, by Dalmeet Singh Chawla.
• Why Open Research, a nice site advocating open access publishing for research

This blog has been updated! Click to see the new 2018 list!

Allegedly, there are over 8.000 so called predatory journals out there. Instead of supporting readers and science, these journals serve their own economic interests first and at best offer dubious merits for scholars. We believe that scholars working in any academic discipline have a professional interest and a responsibility to keep track of these journals. It is our job to warn the young or inexperienced of journals where a publication or editorship could be detrimental to their career. Even with the best of intent, researchers who publish in these journals inadvertently subject themselves to criticism. We have seen “predatory” publishing take off in a big way and noticed how colleagues start to turn up in the pages of some of these journals. This trend, referred to by some as the dark side of publishing, needs to be reversed.

People have for a number of years now turned to Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado, who runs blacklists of “potential, possible, or probable” predatory publishers and journals. His lists are not, however, the final say on the matter, as it is impossible to judge reliably actors in every academic discipline. Moreover, since only questionable journals are listed, the good journals must be found elsewhere. We are much obliged to his work but think that a response of gatekeeping needs also to be anchored in each discipline.

As a suitable response in bioethics, we have chosen the following approach: Below, we alphabetically list the recommended journals in our field that either have an impact over one, as calculated by Thomson Reuters over a five year period, and a good reputation (still no potentially predatory journal in bioethics have received such a high IF, but it might happen), or by our own experience have been found to be of high quality when engaging with them as authors, reviewers and/or readers (and agreed upon by all those involved as authors of this blog post or as reference persons for the lists).

This will make up a list of English-language journals that are reputable, trustworthy and have real impact. Of course we are well aware there are many more journals out there with a lower impact that we have no experience of; many of them will provide good service to authors and readers. There are other lists covering bioethics journals, such as:

• – Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 240 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Published Since 2009 (Georgetown)
• – The CODEX list of journals in the field
• – List from Google Scholar
• – Bioethics: Top Journals of Bioethics (George Mason)

They are all of great use when further exploring the reputable journals available.

It is also important to list the journals that are potentially or possibly predatory or of such a low quality that it might be disqualifying to engage with them. We have listed them alphabetically and provided both the homepage URL and links to any professional discussion of these journals that we have found (which most often alerted us to their existence in the first place). If we have critical remarks ourselves, we have added them.

Each of these journals asks scholars for manuscripts from, or claims to publish papers in, bioethics or related areas (such as practical philosophy). They have been reviewed by the authors of this blog post as well as by a group of reference persons that we have asked for advice on the list. Those journals listed have unanimously been agreed are journals that – in light of the criticism put forth and the quality we see – we would not deem acceptable for us to publish in. Typical signs as to why a journal could fall in this category, such as extensive spamming, publishing in almost any subject, or fake data being included on the website etc., are listed here:

• – 8 Ways to Identify a Questionable Open Access Journal (Chrissy Prater)
• – How to avoid predatory journals—a five point plan (Jocalyn Clark)
• – Identifying and avoiding predatory publishers: a primer for researchers (Canadian Assoc. of Research Libraries)

In light of the fact that all journals on the “where not to publish”-list so far are Open Access (OA), we want to stress our general support for various OA initiatives, while also acknowledging the problems (see the Schöpfel paper referenced at the end of this post).

We would love to hear about your views on these lists, and be especially grateful for pointers to journals engaging in sloppy or bad publishing practices. The lists are not meant as check-lists but as starting points and assistance for any bioethics scholar to ponder for him- or herself where to publish.

Also, anyone thinking that a journal in our list should be given due reconsideration might post their reasons for this as a comment to the blog post or send an email to us. Journals might start out with some sloppy practices but shape up over time and we will be happy to hear about it. You can make an appeal against the inclusion of a journal and we will deal with it promptly and publicly.

Please spread the content of this blog as much as you can and check back for updates (we will do a major update annually and continually add any further information found).

WHERE TO PUBLISH – THE 2016 LIST

Alphabetical list, criteria explained in text above. 5-year impact factors from 2015, rounded off with one decimal, given in parenthesis, if over 1.

• Accountability in Research
• American Journal of Bioethics (4.0)
• Bioethics (1.5)
• Biology & Philosophy (1.2)
• BMC Medical Ethics (1.7)
• Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics
• Clinical Ethics
• Developing World Bioethics (1.7)
• Ethics (1.8)
• Ethics and Information Technology (1.1)
• Hastings Center Report (1.4)
• Health Care Analysis (1.2)
• Journal of Academic Ethics
• Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics (1.1)
• Journal of Clinical Ethics
• Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics (1.4)
• Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (1.1)
• Journal of Medical Ethics (1.4)
• Journal of Medicine & Philosophy
• Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal (1.1)
• Medicine Health Care & Philosophy
• Milbank Quarterly (6.3)
• Neuroethics (1.2)
• Nursing Ethics (1.6)
• Public Health Ethics (1.1)
• Research Ethics
• Science & Engineering Ethics (1.1)
• Science, Technology and Human Values (2.5)
• Social Science and Medicine (3.5)
• Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

WHERE NOT TO PUBLISH – THE 2016 LIST

• American Research Thougts (Bridge Center Publishing House)
  Criticism
• Creative Education (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
  Critical remark (February 2016): They claim to be indexed in PubMed but this relates to one author manuscript only, uploaded into PMC, as far as we can see
• East European Scientific Journal (East European Research Alliance)
  Criticism
• European Academic Research (Bridge Center)
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
  Critical remark (Feb 2016): Uses impact factor from Universal Impact Factor which is criticized here
• European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute)
  Criticism
• International Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
  Critical remark (Feb 2016): Impact factor from International Services for Impact Factor & Indexing
• International Journal of Current Research
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2: On Beall’s list
• International Journal of Ethics & Moral Philosophy (Journal Network)
  Criticism
• International Journal of Ethics in Engineering & Management Education
  Critical remark (Feb 2016): Papers from almost any field; Citation indexing by GJIF (4.1 they claim), ISRA and Index Copernicus; A non-existent address in “Varginia”, US (sic!); Open access but asks for the copyright
• International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (Centre for Promoting Ideas)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3: On Beall’s list
• Internet Journal of Law, Healthcare and Ethics (ISPUB)
  Criticism 1 │Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
• International Journal of Philosophy (SciencePG)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
• International Journal of Public Health and Human Rights (Bioinfo Publications)
  Criticism
• International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences (Sryahwa Publications)
  Critisism: On Beall’s list
• International Journal of Science Social Studies Humanities and Management (Brainy Buzz)
  Criticism
• International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (Research Publish Journals)
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
• International Open Journal of Philosophy (Academic and Scientific Publishing)
  Criticism
  Critical remark: Have published only 1 article in its first three years of existence
• International Researchers
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
• Journal of Academic and Business Ethics (Academic and Business Research Institute)
  Criticism
• Journal of Advances in Philosophy (Council for Innovative Research)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2
• Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics (OMICS)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
• Journal of Law and Ethics
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
• Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities
  Criticism: On Beall’s list
• Open Journal of Philosophy (Scientific Research Publishing – SCIRP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3 │ Criticism 4
• Philosophical Papers and Review (Academic Journals)
  Criticism: Blacklisted by the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia
  Critical remark: Although it claims to be a peer-review journal, it states that manuscripts “are reviewed by editorial board members or other qualified persons” (accessed March 24, 2016).
• Philosophy Study (David Publishing Company)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3
• World Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (Science and Education Publishing, SciEP)
  Criticism 1 │ Criticism 2 │ Criticism 3

In light of recent legal action taken against people trying to warn others about dubious publishers and journals – see here and here – we want to stress that this blog post is about where we would like our papers to show up, it is about quality, and as such it is an expression of a professional judgement intended to help others find good journals to publish with. As such it is no different from other rankings that can be found for various products and services everywhere. Our list of where not to publish implies no accusation of deception or fraud but claims to identify journals that experienced bioethicists would usually not find to be of high quality. Those criticisms linked to might be more upfront or confrontational; us linking to them does not imply an endorsement of any objectionable statement made therein. We would also like to point out that individual papers published in these journals might of course nevertheless be perfectly acceptable contributions to the scholarly literature of bioethics.

Stefan Eriksson & Gert Helgesson

Read more about Stefan’s work at CRB here

• Essential resources on so-called predatory publishing and open access:
• Bait-And-Switch Publishing: New Face of Academic Fraud, by Farooq A. Kperogi.
• Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences, by John D Bowman.
• Predatory and Fake Scientific Journals/Publishers – A Global Outbreak with Rising Trend: A Review, by Tin et al.
• ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics, by Cenyu Shen and Bo-Christer Björk.
• Spurious alternative impact factors: The scale of the problem from an academic perspective, by Gutierrez et al.
• The Writing Style of Predatory Publishers, by Markowitz et al.
• How should we treat those taken in by predatory journals?, by Dalmeet Singh Chawla.
• Schöpfel, J: “Open access – the rise and fall of a community-driven model of scientific communication”, Learned Publishing 28 (2015):321-25 (not freely available).
• Why Open Research, a nice site advocating open access publishing for research