What Can Be Learned about Predatory Journals from a Failed Study? Possible Motivations behind Predatory Journals

Predatory journals, with low standards of publication, means flawed or fraudulent research can compromise future research. Often called ‘predatory’ or ‘deceptive’ publishers, both these terms have an implication that the editors and publishers behind them have a motivation to deceive or con authors. However, the motivations remain an assumption because little is known about the individuals behind these journals. This research intended to use qualitative, in-depth interviews to find out more about the individuals behind predatory journals. By engaging with them directly, we hoped to gain an understanding of how they see themselves in the publishing landscape, what value they add and how they achieve these aims. Emails received by the authors were mined for contact information of suspected predatory journals. Over the course of a year, 2552 emails were sent inviting respondents to an interview, for which there would be a small monetary compensation. Despite sending 2552 emails, only three responses were received, and all three did not schedule an interview when prompted. Two of the three requested that a translator be present. A significant percentage of the emails (36.2 per cent) bounced back, indicating the contact information was not valid. While the information gained was limited, it would appear many are aware of the dubious nature of their journal and do not wish further scrutiny by being contacted. Others may lack the English-language skills necessary to be engaged in basic written communication, let alone the more complex language and grammar of scientific publishing.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.