• Who is Actually Harmed by Predatory Publishers?

    Author(s):
    Martin Paul Eve (see profile) , Ernesto Priego (see profile)
    Date:
    2017
    Group(s):
    TM Literary and Cultural Theory
    Subject(s):
    Digital scholarship, Scholarly communication
    Item Type:
    Article
    Tag(s):
    open access
    Permanent URL:
    http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/M65R6J
    Abstract:
    “Predatory publishing” refers to conditions under which gold open-access academic publishers claim to conduct peer review and charge for their publishing services but do not, in fact, actually perform such reviews. Most prominently exposed in recent years by Jeffrey Beall, the phenomenon garners much media attention. In this article, we acknowledge that such practices are deceptive but then examine, across a variety of stakeholder groups, what the harm is from such actions to each group of actors. We find that established publishers have a strong motivation to hype claims of predation as damaging to the scholarly and scientific endeavour while noting that, in fact, systems of peer review are themselves already acknowledged as deeply flawed.
    Metadata:
    Published as:
    Journal article    
    Status:
    Published
    Last Updated:
    3 days ago
    License:
    Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives

    Downloads

    Item Name: pdf 867-3743-1-pb.pdf
      Download View in browser
    Activity: Downloads: 17