137

The way I usually choose journals is by looking at where people I trust/follow publish, and where previous work was published. It is usually not too hard to compare the quality your work to the quality of the work you are citing, and chose a target based on that. Unless your field is highly mutli-disciplinary, you will see the same journals/conferences ...


108

You may want to check that the publisher is not on Beall's List of Predatory, Open-Access Publishers. Surprisingly, the publisher in question is not. I've found Beall's list to be fairly comprehensive, but the vanity press industry seems to be booming. Caveat: that list is just one guy's opinion. But it resonates with my own experience. Update: As of ...


95

A "fake" or "shady" journal is a low-quality journal that does little or no quality control. They are often called "predatory" because they prey on people who are under a lot of pressure to publish, charging high author fees for promises of quick publication. (Since they do little, if any, peer review, the time from submission of a paper to publication is ...


90

No. Publishing a thesis this way has no academic value whatsoever. (I.e., it will lead to no prestige, respectability, credit, etc. For academic purposes, it will not count as a published book, except for interfering with other forms of publication.) LAP's business model seems to be collecting as many theses and other unpublished academic documents as ...


70

This is a scam. You are not the ones being scammed, however. The editors are proposing to scam your readers, with your assistance, making you scammers as well. Walk away before you damage your reputation.


61

I have interacted with several reputable math/TCS journals, both as author and as reviewer, entirely via email without the involvement of an online submission. I have even witnessed senior members of the community expressing the sentiment that they never agree to the semi-automated referee requests sent by online submission systems, but only to referee ...


55

This is a very important question, as even non-predatory publishers can have problems and face difficult times, eventually closing altogether (e.g. Heart Lung and Vessels). As stated in the comment by FuzzyLeapfrog, it is very important to double check what you actually agreed upon by submitting your manuscript and when signing the copyright agreement (take ...


52

I heard about Beall's list several times on this site, but I'm amazed about its significance to some people. When you start doing research, you need to know which papers are important in your field (your advisor or google scholar will tell you). Then you need to know who is the big shots, and not so big shots in your field. Then you need to know where those ...


50

Do not think about the journal where the paper comes from. Just forget about it for a while. Now, read the paper. Even better, be a reviewer for that paper. Evaluate it. Is it a good related work for you? Is it a not-so-good related work, so that you can criticize it? Does it help you to build some hypotheses, etc.? Then, just cite it. Otherwise, don't. ...


50

Whether or not this is a scam, it is completely unethical. Under no circumstances is someone entitled to a publication credit in exchange for "free" publication of a paper. Don't forget that many reputable journals do not charge publication fees. It may be entirely possible for you to get your paper published without such an arrangement, which will be ...


48

Look at the editorial board. If it contains respectable, well-known researchers in the field, then it's likely to be a serious journal.


48

Don't waste your time with it. You were smart to catch how the mail might have been generated (keywords etc). These mails are often sent out by journals that turn out to be predatory*; you wouldn't like to be associated with it. If you accept, you may find your name being used here and there, in an attempt to increase the journal's scientific credibility. ...


47

I see two main barriers for this to happen, and I would not attempt to cross either unless the circumstances were truly exceptional. If your paper is already published, you will most likely have transferred either the paper's copyright or a very wide license to the original journal. You can probably force the journal to retract the paper, but if you want ...


47

As noted in the question, Beall's list once was a method for identifying predatory publishers. However, the list is no more. A recent Publons blog post addressed how to id predatory journals. Summarizing their post, here are some methods of identifying predatory journals. Most of their methods are more positive than Beall (i.e., they point out good journals ...


46

You can now submit it elsewhere. It has not been published and it is not under consideration anywhere, so you are free to resubmit it. The fact that the first journal was predatory is only relevant because that was the reason you withdrew the paper.


45

If the paper has not yet been accepted for publication, you are free to withdraw the paper from consideration. Depending on the policies of the journal to which you submit the article, you may need to disclose the prior submission, and explain why you withdrew the publication from consideration. Unfortunately, there's little you can do to stop the ...


44

I wouldn't worry too much about tact. There's enough information in your question to identify the journal, and it looks impressively bad, even by the dismal standards of junk journals. It's so terrible that I'd consider it unethical to be actively involved as an editor, and humiliating to be passively involved. Bringing this to the editors' attention ...


41

First, you should probably publish in the same venues that you read and cite. Presumably those are reputable. Now to describe low-quality vanity publishers. Two essential characteristics are: The publication of very low quality material. This is usually immediately recognizable to any expert. Sometimes it's obvious to anyone; for example, read this ...


41

The best way is by word-of-mouth: ask around the department, ask your PhD advisor, ask people you've worked with. If it is a specialist journal, and you are a specialist, then the next best way is to look at the previously published issues of the journal and see what kinds of articles they accept. Failing that, the Australian Government's Research ...


41

aesmail's post is right on. In addition, I would recommend creating some Google Alerts for some unique sentences or phrases from your article as well. Use quotes around the whole text in each query. Make sure that the ones you pick are unique to your work by finding query strings that are exactly from your work and return no results on Google now. That way, ...


40

"How do you judge the quality of a journal?" One answer is already known to you: Submit a paper to it and see how it responds. I once submitted a few papers to an online journal (no print equivalent) and the referee reports that I got clearly showed that they read and understood the paper and that they knew the subject well. They even suggested ways how ...


40

Joining an editorial board is a form of endorsement as well as a service to the community. You should never become an editor unless: You understand how the publisher and journal operate, and you have good reason to believe the operations are competent and professional in every way. You know the other editors, at least by reputation, and are certain that ...


39

So what is, if anything, being done about this? Ignore them. No, you are not missing anything. These journals are scams, not serious scientific literature. If you plan to publish a longer version of your conference paper, send it to one of the journals that your paper cites, or at least to a journal where you recognize a significant fraction of the ...


38

Jeffrey Beall, who works for the University of Colorado, Denver, maintained a list of predatory journals. He also publishes his criteria for determining which journals/publishers are predatory. (both links are to archived version of the pages) The criteria are numerous (and I find many of them amusing). The main thrust of the criteria are such things as: ...


38

While publishing in a predatory journal doesn't help your CV, I don't see this as anything near a fatal mistake even if you are pursuing a career in academia. The main cost is just the wasted time and effort and the fact that you could have gotten credit for these papers if published elsewhere. Given that you were at such an early career stage when you ...


37

Quick acceptance (a month) is pretty surprising for many disciplines, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in itself. But if the journal "guarantees quick acceptance", you should be very suspicious, since reputable journals do not bother with any rhetoric in that direction. Being listed as a predatory journal is a very negative indicator... though, if we ...


36

Beall's list is grounds for high suspicion, not a ban. In the case of this particular journal, it looks like not a very good journal, but not an obvious scam. Google Scholar finds a number of articles with moderate citations, and on first inspection they don't look like metric gaming, so it looks like it wouldn't be a black mark on one's record. Bottom ...


33

No; this isn't how reputable venues approach authors. This will have at best zero value (possibly negative value if someone notices, which is unlikely given how little visibility they apparently have), and will cost you $38. (Its funny that they advertise that they get 8000 website hits per month. This strikes me as an exceedingly low count, given that ...


32

You have no obligation to accept reviews from any journals. In the long term, you should of course accept review tasks, since the review system is built on everyone doing their part in return for the reviews you get on your own papers. But if you think the journal is not serious, there is no need to waste your time on a review. The problem will lie in ...


31

Absolutely not. While open-source journals can charge authors to help recoup the publishing costs in the absence of paid subscriptions, it is completely dishonest for a journal to "republish" a work that has already appeared in print. It is even more dishonest for them to charge you to do it. At best this is just an advertising service; at worst it's a scam....


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible