Skip to main content
Log in

The Ethics of Predatory Journals

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Predatory journals operate as vanity presses, typically charging large submission or publication fees and requiring little peer review. The consequences of such journals are wide reaching, affecting the integrity of the legitimate journals they attempt to imitate, the reputations of the departments, colleges, and universities of their contributors, the actions of accreditation bodies, the reputations of their authors, and perhaps even the generosity of academic benefactors. Using a stakeholder analysis, our study of predatory journals suggests that most stakeholders gain little in the short run from such publishing and only the editors or owners of these journals benefit in the long run. We also discuss counter-measures that academic and administrative faculty can employ to thwart predatory publishing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488–500. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1879431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balson, R. H. (2013). Bestseller success stories that started out as self-published books. Huff Post Books (10/08/2013). Retrieved http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ronald-h-balson/bestseller-success-storie_b_4064574.html.

  • Beall, J. (2014). Bogus journal accepts profanity-laced anti-spam paper [Electronic resource]. Scholarly Open Access: Internet blog. Retrieved http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/11/20/bogus-journal-accepts-profanity-lacedantispam-paper.

  • Beall, J. (2015a). Predatory journals and the breakdown of research cultures. Information Development, 31(5), 473–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beall, J. (2015b). Beall’s list. Retrieved http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/.

  • Bedeian, A. G. (2004). Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(2), 198–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellas, M. L., & Toutkoushian, R. K. (1999). Faculty time allocations and research productivity: Gender, race and family effects. The Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 367–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review? Science, 342, 60–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornemann, E. (2013). Exposing predatory publishers. Information Today, 30(6), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, L. J., & Dunn, P. (2004). Business & professional ethics (7th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. (1999). The writing is on the web for science journals in print. Nature, 397(6716), 195–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, P. (2009). Open access publisher accepts nonsense manuscript for dollars. The Scholarly Kitchen, 10, 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, C. (2012). On predatory publishers: A Q&A with Jeffrey Beall. Chronicle of Higher EducationBlogs. Retrieved http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/on-predatory-publishers-a-qa-with-jeffrey-beall/47667.

  • Fabianic, D. (2002). Publication productivity of criminal justice faculty in criminal justice journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(6), 549–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J. (2013). Notable moments in self-publishing history: A timeline. Poets and Writers Magazine (November/December). Retrieved http://www.pw.org/content/notable_moments_in_selfpublishing_history_a_timeline.

  • Gale Cengage Learning, “Academic OneFile,” Gale Cengage Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved http://www.cengage.com/search/productOverview.do?Ntt=onefile|129663692219470930731132330063644714.

  • Garfield, E. (1996). An old proposal for a new profession: scientific reviewing. The Scientist, 10(16), 12–13.

  • Gutierrez, F. R. S., Beall, J., & Forero, D. A. (2015). Spurious alternative impact factors: The scale of the problem from an academic perspective. BioEssays, 37(5), 474–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolata, G. (2013, April 7). Scientific articles accepted (personal checks, too). New York Times.

  • Lakhotia, S. C. (2015). Predatory journals and academic pollution. Current Science, 108(8), 1407–1408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, D. (2015). Scholars detect eightfold rise in ‘predatory’ journal papers. Times Higher Education, 2223, 11–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuarie, F. (2015). Predatory journals: An experiment. All About Work: News & Views on Work and Organizations. http://allaboutwork.org/2015/01/26/predatory-journals-an-experiment/.

  • Nelson, N, & Huffman, J. (2015). Predatory journals in library databases: How much should we worry? The Serials Librarian, 69, 169–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, A. (2009). Professing to learn: Creating tenured lives and careers in the American Research University. No. 475. Baltimore: JHU Press.

  • O’Donnell, K. (2015, May 19). Re: Pay-to-Publish Journals. A blog on the AACSB website on the topic of pay-to-publish journals.

  • O’Leary, D. L. (2000). Accreditation’s role in reducing medical errors. Western Journal of Medicine, 172(6), 357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prados, J. W., Peterson, G. D., & Lattuca, L. R. (2005). Quality assurance of engineering education through accreditation: The impact of Engineering Criteria 2000 and its global influence. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. (2013, October 4). Hundreds of open access journals accept face science paper. Guardian Professional.

  • Shen, C, & Bjork, B.-C. (2015). ‘Predatory’ open access: A longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Medicine, 13(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suber, P. (2009). Ten challenges for open-access journals. SPARC Open Access Newsletter, 138. Retrieved https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4316131/suber_10challenges.html?sequence=2.

  • Thomas, H, & Trapnell, J. E. (2007). AACSB International accreditation: The value proposition and a look to the future. Journal of Management Development, 26(1), 67–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xia, J., Harmon, J. L., Connolly, K. G., Donnelly, R. M., Anderson, M. R., & Howard, H. A. (2015). Who publishes in ‘predatory’ journals? Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(7), 1406–1417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was completed independently without a source of funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arline Savage.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Alexander McLeod, Arline Savage and Mark Simkin declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McLeod, A., Savage, A. & Simkin, M.G. The Ethics of Predatory Journals. J Bus Ethics 153, 121–131 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3419-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3419-9

Keywords

Navigation