Affiliation:
1. CIBER Research Ltd
2. Universidad de León
3. Université de Lyon
4. Wuhan University
5. University of Malaya
6. Uniwersytet Warminsko-Mazurski
7. University of Tennessee
8. Charles Sturt University
Abstract
Around 170 early career researchers (ECRs) from 8 countries were interviewed about the whole range of their scholarly communication attitudes/behaviours during pandemic times and this paper analyses what they said about predatory journals in a wide range of scholarly communication contexts. Because of the delicacy of the topic there was just one question exclusively directed at predatory journals, which asked about policies rather than actions, which yielded nevertheless wide-ranging comments on the topic. ECRs also volunteered information on predatory journals in another half dozen questions, most notably including one on questionable research practices. The source of data was mainly the final interview of three undertaken, with some comparisons made to rounds one and two. Findings disclose the existence of a whole raft of formal and informal assessment policies/coded that direct ECRs to legitimate journals and away from predatory ones. Despite being junior, ECRs are very accultured to the criteria of what is considered as prestige and quality and believe predatory publishing is not even conceivable. They are far more concerned about low-quality research, preprints and borderline ‘grey’ journals. The pandemic has increased the level of questionable practices and low-quality research, but predatory journals were only singled out by a relatively small number of ECRs.
Publisher
Ediciones Profesionales de la Informacion SL
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems,General Medicine
Reference55 articles.
1. Abalkina, Anna (2021). “Detecting a network of hijacked journals by its archive”. Scientometrics, n. 126, pp. 7123-7148. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-021-04056-0
2. Alecci, Scilla (2018). New international investigation tackles ‘fake science’ and its poisonous effects. Blog post, 20 July. https://www.icij.org/blog/2018/07/new-international-investigation-tackles-fake-science-and-its-poisonous-effects
3. Alrawadieh, Zaid (2018). “Publishing in predatory tourism and hospitality journals: Mapping the academic market and identifying response strategies”. Tourism and hospitality research, v. 20, n. 1, pp. 72-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358418800121
4. Bagues, Manuel F.; Sylos-Labini, Mauro; Zinovyeva, Natalia (2017). A walk on the wild side: An investigation into the quantity and quality of ‘predatory’ publications in Italian academia (N. 2017/01). LEM working paper series. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/174551
5. Cobey, Kelly D.; Grudniewicz, Agnes; Lalu, Manuj M.; Rice, Danielle B.; Raffoul, Hanna; Moher, David (2019). “Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: a survey”. BMJ open, v. 9, n. 3, e026516. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026516
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献