Predatory Publishing Lists: A Review on the Ongoing Battle Against Fraudulent Actions

Main Article Content

Hiwa O. Abdullah
Berun A. Abdalla
Fahmi H. Kakamad
Jafaar O. Ahmed
Hiwa O. Baba
Marwan N. Hassan
Rawa Bapir
Hawbash M. Rahim
Diyar A. Omar
Suhaib H. Kakamad
Shvan H. Mohammed
Karokh K. Mohammed
Tomas M. Mikael
Fakher Abdullah
Dahat A. Hussein
Sasan M. Ahmed
Sarhang S. Abdalla
Hemn A. Hassan
Sherko R. Azeez
Shevan M. Mustafa
Snur Othman

Keywords

Predatory publishers, Predatory journals, Beall’s list, Cabells’ list, Kscien’s list, Early Warning List of International Journals

Abstract

Predatory journals challenge the scholarly community by muddling the boundary between legitimate and dubious publishing practices. Despite the awareness of predatory publishers, there are no globally accepted criteria for identifying them. Various warning lists have emerged as predatory practices evolve, but they are not impervious to criticism despite their utility. This study reviewed the most common of the predatory lists. Beall's list, the pioneer in exposing predatory publishers, received criticism for its inclusion criteria. It is now anonymously managed and poorly updated. Cabells' list has a broad range of inclusion criteria; however, some have been criticized for redundancy and lack of alignment with predatory practices. Kscien's list shows promise as an alternative for spotting predatory journals and publishers. However, it requires refinement since the included journals, based on their core criteria, are not distinguished from those included using traditional criteria. The Early Warning List of International Journals is a recent compilation with diverse criteria. Despite attracting the scientific community's attention, there are questions about the reliability of its inclusion criteria. However, these lists are crucial in flagging predatory publishers; researchers can depend on them while preparing their manuscripts.

Abstract 101 | PDF Downloads 20

References

1. Kakamad FH, Mohammed SH, Najar KA, Qadr GA, Ahmed JO, Karukh K M, et al. Kscien's list; a new strategy to hoist predatory journals and publishers. International Journal of Surgery Open. 2019; 17: 5-7. doi:10.1016/j.ijso.2019.01.002
2. Thyo EM. Predatory Journals & Developing Countries. Barw Medical Journal. 2023;1(2):1. doi:10.58742/bmj.v1i2.20
3. Beall J. “Predatory” open-access scholarly publishers. The Charleston Advisor. 2010;11(4):10-7. doi:N/A
4. Kakamad FH, Salih AM, Mohammed SH. Predatory journals: evolution keeps them under the radar. Nature 2020;580:29–30. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-00910-y
5. Muhialdeen AS, Ahmed JO, Baba HO, Abdullah IY, Hassan HA, Najar KA, et al: Kscien's List; A New Strategy to Discourage Predatory Journals and Publishers (Second Version). Barw Med J.2023; 1 (1): 1 3. doi:10.58742/bmj.v1i1.14
6. Da Silva JA, Moradzadeh M, Yamada Y, Dunleavy DJ, Tsigaris P. Cabells' Predatory Reports criteria: Assessment and proposed revisions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2023;49(1):102659. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102659
7. Mo Y, Liang G, Zhen N, Lin H, Xiang H, Liu E, et al. Establishment of an early warning list of SCI-indexed international journals with dual benefits for both scientists and publishers. Publishing Research. 2023;2(1). doi:10.48130/PR-2023-0003
8. Kakamad FH, Mohammed SH, Najar KA, et al. Kscien’s list; a new strategy to discourage predatory journals and publishers. Int J Surg Open 2020;23:54–6.doi: doi:10.1016/j.ijso.2019.11.001
9. Beall J. Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2016;98(2):77-9. doi:10.1308/rcsann.2016.0056
10. Mohammed, K. K., Hama, J. I., Kakamad, F. H. Beyond Beall's list: The need for contemporary evaluation tools in predatory publishing research. Learned Publishing. 2024;37(2), 157-158. doi:10.1002/leap.1602
11. Cabells. (2020). Announcement regarding brand-wide language changes, effective immediately. June 8, 2020; last accessed: December 18, 2022. blog. https://blog.cabells.com/2020/06/08/announcement/
12. Early Warning Journal List. 2020. accessed on January 24, 2024. https://earlywarning.fenqubiao.com/#/en/
13. The Retraction Watch Database. New York: The Center for Scientific Integrity. 2018. [2021-12-31]. Available at http://retractiondatabase.org/
14. Else H, Van Noorden R. The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science. Nature. 2021;591(7851):516-20. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-00733-5
15. John Bohannon. Who is Afraid of Peer Review?. Science. 2013: 342, 60-65. doi:10.1126/science.2013.342.6154.342_60
16. Kakamad, Fahmi H. PhDa,b,c; Salih, Abdulwahid M. MDa,c; Abdulla, Berwn A. BScb,c; Abdullah, Fakher LLBb; Ahmed, Jaafar O. MDb; Salih, Rawezh Q. BScb,c; Mohammed, Shvan H. BScb; Mikael, Tomas M. BScb,c; Kakamad, Suhaib H. BScb; Fatah, Gona M. BScb,c. Analysis of 5000 predatory emails. IJS: Short Reports 6(1):p e16, January/March 2021. doi:10.1097/SR9.0000000000000016
17. Mohammed Shvan H., Kakamad Fahmi H., Salih Abdulwahid M., Omar Diyar A., Mikael Tomas M., Hassan Marwan N., et al. Predatory journals in oncology: prevalence and impacts. IJS: Short Reports. 2022;7(3): 55. doi:10.1097/SR9.0000000000000055
18. Cascella M, De Cassai A, Navalesi P. Proscription lists and predatory publishers: Pointing to careful certifications. Quantitative Science Studies. 2023;4(2): 489-90. doi:10.1162/qss_a_00251
19. Carroll CW. Spotting the wolf in sheep's clothing: predatory open access publications. Journal of graduate medical education. 2016;8(5):662-4. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-16-00128.1
20. Richtig G, Berger M, Koeller M, Richtig M, Richtig E, Scheffel J, et al. Predatory journals: Perception, impact and use of Beall’s list by the scientific community–A bibliometric big data study. Plos one. 2023;18(7): e0287547. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0287547
21. Beall’s list. Beall’s list of potential predatory journals and publishers. December 8, 2021. https://beallslist.net/#
22. Bisaccio M. Cabells’ Journal Whitelist and Blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations. Learned Publishing. 2018;31(3): 243-8. doi:10.1002/leap.1164
23. Dony C, Raskinet M, Renaville F, Simon S, Thirion P. How reliable and useful is Cabell's Blacklist? A data-driven analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.05392. 2020 Sep 11. doi:10.18352/lq.10339
24. Murphy JA. Predatory publishing and the response from the scholarly community. Serials Review. 2019;45(1-2):73-8. doi:10.1080/00987913.2019.1624910
25. Akça S, Akbulut M. Are predatory journals contaminating science? An analysis on the Cabells' Predatory Report. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2021;47(4):102366. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102366
26. Kscien Organization (2018). Kscien Organization website, Predatory publishing, accessed on October 18, 2023. https://kscien.org/predatory.php
27. Zhang L, Wei Y, Huang Y, Sivertsen G. What makes a journal questionable? An analysis using China’s early-warning list. SocArXiv 94v5m, Center for Open Science. 2021 Sep 6. doi:10.31219/osf.io/94v5m

Kscien’s List; A New Strategy to Discourage Predatory Journals and Publishers (Second Version)

Aso S. Muhialdeen, Jaafar Omer Ahmed, Hiwa O. Baba, Ismael Y. Abdullah, Hemn Ali Hassan, Kayhan...