In preparing my academic vita for applications to PhD programs, I came across this question: Since I have some papers published in less known journals, should I list them or not to list them?
Will listing them instead hurt my applications?
Academia Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for academics and those enrolled in higher education. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
PhD admission committees look for evidence of your ability to successfully complete the PhD program. Published papers can be a big hint that the answer is "yes".
Unless it can be argued that the journal is a predatory one, I would suggest mentioning the published paper in your application if you think that the paper is of good quality. Even when the journal is not so well known (but has good standards), it shows that you can perform the type of work expected from you if they choose to accept you.
Here is a well-known list of predatory journals.
As DCTLib says, you probably shouldn't publicize publications to any of these. For any others, go ahead! A less reputable journal paper is better than no journal paper. Once you have dozens of publications, you can start thinking of filtering out less reputable stuff.
Note: I would have added this as a comment to the previous answer, but don't have the reputation.
Unless you have published in predatory or other journals with some suspicious reputation, all publications count positively. The more you demonstrate your productivity the stronger your application. How much each publication counts will depend on other factors, like the order of authorship (being first or middle; note that depending on the field ordering may be irrelevant) or how many times the publication has been cited.
I asked this same question from the other side of the table: Value of light-to-none peer reviewed pay-to-publish articles when I had a student apply to do a Phd with me who had three articles published in essentially predatory journals (maybe a hair better). My concern was that the papers indicate a student whose potential goals are not well aligned with the requirements of many competitive PhD programs. The answers convinced me that that is not a big issue. I would suggest including them and mentioning in your cover letter/statement of purpose that you understand the differences between high and low quality publishers. I think that would help to convince potential supervisors to evaluate the publications based on the quality of the research and not the place of publication.
From a current PhD student:
I would definitely recommend listing them on your CV.
The publication expectations for PhD applicants are relatively low (compared to postdocs, etc), and many PhD applicants don't have a published manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal yet. So having something on your CV that shows you're published, even if in a journal with a 0.1 impact factor (lesser known), will still make you stand out.
Something else to consider - humans are busy. And academicians are super busy. And unless you're applying to a program in the same field as the journal you published in, there's a good chance the people reviewing your application won't even know the quality of the journal on your CV. And they most likely won't look it up. And even if they do, the key is that you've published something. This, in itself, is great.
As I see it, you can only gain from adding these to your CV.
If you are just beginning your Academic carrier, list EVERY reputable publication, including popular pubs such as magazines and news stories (be sure non-peer reviewed pubs are marked).
Even after you have several publications, and need to thin your CV, keep a list of all published articles in a longer format CV in case it is needed by a committee of some sort.