Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Identifying predatory publishers

Dec 2, 2018#1

Emrys

This question is for those in academia - how do you identify predatory publishers/journals/etc? I administer a scholarship competition that relies heavily on the applicant's publishing record. The higher-ups really want to crack down on students who knowing publish with predatory journals, so I get the task of going through the applications and identifying the predatory publications. Of course, I haven't been given a lot of guidance on this, just the suggestion to start with Beall's and go from there, but I'm an administrator, not an academic, and I wouldn't know a predatory journal if it bit me on the arse.

So, I'm reaching out to the vast pool of knowledge that is Halforums. Can anyone help me with this?

I like the word "predatory".

Dec 2, 2018#2

Hailey Knight

What do they mean by predatory though? On whom?

Dec 2, 2018#3

Emrys

Hailey Zero Mission said:
What do they mean by predatory though? On whom?

Basically as defined in the Wikipedia link I provided:

"Predatory open-access publishing is an exploitative open-access academic publishing business model that involves charging publication fees to authors without providing the editorial and publishing services associated with legitimate journals (open access or not). The idea that they are "predatory" is based on the view that academics are tricked into publishing with them, though some authors may be aware that the journal is poor quality or even fraudulent. New scholars from developing countries are said to be especially at risk of being misled by predatory practices."

Dec 2, 2018#4

Hailey Knight

Emrys said:
Basically as defined in the Wikipedia link I provided:

"Predatory open-access publishing is an exploitative open-access academic publishing business model that involves charging publication fees to authors without providing the editorial and publishing services associated with legitimate journals (open access or not). The idea that they are "predatory" is based on the view that academics are tricked into publishing with them, though some authors may be aware that the journal is poor quality or even fraudulent. New scholars from developing countries are said to be especially at risk of being misled by predatory practices."

I suppose then look at the cited journals submission guidelines. If a reading fee is noted, that would qualify as predatory.

Dec 2, 2018#5

DarkAudit

Doing the thing again? Seriously?

Dec 2, 2018#6

PatrThom

DarkAudit said:
Doing the thing again? Seriously?

Yes, for:

Emrys said:
I like the word "predatory".

...obviously.

--Patrick

Dec 2, 2018#7

figmentPez

PatrThom said:
Yes, for:

...obviously.

--Patrick

Have you noticed the icon for the rating? It's a "Do Not Enter" sign. Are you expressing the wish that Emrys cease to do the thing?

Dec 3, 2018#8

Tinwhistler

Emrys said:
Basically as defined in the Wikipedia link I provided:

"Predatory open-access publishing is an exploitative open-access academic publishing business model that involves charging publication fees to authors without providing the editorial and publishing services associated with legitimate journals (open access or not). The idea that they are "predatory" is based on the view that academics are tricked into publishing with them, though some authors may be aware that the journal is poor quality or even fraudulent. New scholars from developing countries are said to be especially at risk of being misled by predatory practices."

There's a few websites for fiction authors to look these things up.
https://www.sfwa.org/other-resources/for-authors/writer-beware/
is a good one.

I'm unaware of whether anything similar exists for academic journals, other than Beall's

Dec 3, 2018#9

PatrThom

figmentPez said:
Have you noticed the icon for the rating? It's a "Do Not Enter" sign. Are you expressing the wish that Emrys cease to do the thing?

Originally, the YADTT rating was created as a way to badge those posts where it appears a poster takes something SO out of context that the person giving the rating believes that misinterpretation to have been deliberate. It was intended as a way to call someone out for exhibiting behavior most commonly associated with (and commonly perpetrated by) one particular forumite (whom I shall not name).

However, through common usage, the YADTT rating has also gained an alternate definition, one where it is given to call out a forumite for exhibiting behavior most commonly associated with that specific forumite, such as when @GasBandit espouses Libertarian ideology, @DarkAudit rails against Big Coal, or when @Dave declares his distaste for deep-fried distal digits.

When encountering the YADTT rating "in the wild," both options should be considered before lighting the bonfires of indignation.
Also, if you can think of a better/more appropriate icon than the Do Not Enter sign, PLEASE suggest it, because I'm right there with you that it doesn't really fit, but everything I've come up with so far looks awful once shrunk down to rating badge size.

--Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#10

Dave

My distaste for distal digits?

Dec 3, 2018#11

Bubble181

Dave said:
My distaste for distal digits?

Since you predate their existence? I think?

Dec 3, 2018#12

PatrThom

Dave said:
My distaste for distal digits?

Really? You didn't get it?

Rat toes intolerant.

--Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#13

Dave

Okay, I was thinking distal digits in general, not one that were specific to rodentia.

Dec 3, 2018#14

Gruebeard

Emrys said:
So, I'm reaching out to the vast pool of knowledge that is Halforums. Can anyone help me with this?

I like the word "predatory".

Sorry I can't help; when it comes to knowing things I prefer to stay where it's shallow. Cthulhu's lurking in the deep end.

Dec 3, 2018#15

PatrThom

Dave said:
Okay, I was thinking distal digits in general, not one that were specific to rodentia.

Yeah. I tried but couldn’t come up with a relevant rat-related word that started with the letter D.

—Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#16

Gruebeard

PatrThom said:
Yeah. I tried but couldn’t come up with a relevant rat-related word that started with the letter D.

—Patrick

Drat!

Dec 3, 2018#17

GasBandit

PatrThom said:
Yeah. I tried but couldn’t come up with a relevant rat-related word that started with the letter D.

—Patrick

I'd have gone with Deep-fried Distal Digits, given that the food item in question are prepared thus.

But I don't know anything about predatory publishing. Sorry, Emrys.

Dec 3, 2018#18

IronBrig4

I get emails from predatory journals every once in a while. I know to look for certain signs.

1. Really blatant ENGRISH. So many of these publishers originate from China.

2. They will say you presented a certain paper at a certain conference. Many organizations post their conference programs online so it's quite easy for these scammers to look it up. However, they cannot tell you anything specific about WHY they liked your paper.

3. They're a brand new journal that is JUST getting started and they need contributions from you.

Dec 3, 2018#19

Emrys

DarkAudit said:
Doing the thing again? Seriously?

@PatrThom evidently thinks I'm a predator. I can't imagine how he got that idea. </s>

Dec 3, 2018#20

Emrys

PatrThom said:
Originally, the YADTT rating was created as a way to badge those posts where it appears a poster takes something SO out of context that the person giving the rating believes that misinterpretation to have been deliberate. It was intended as a way to call someone out for exhibiting behavior most commonly associated with (and commonly perpetrated by) one particular forumite (whom I shall not name).

However, through common usage, the YADTT rating has also gained an alternate definition, one where it is given to call out a forumite for exhibiting behavior most commonly associated with that specific forumite, such as when @GasBandit espouses Libertarian ideology, @DarkAudit rails against Big Coal, or when @Dave declares his distaste for deep-fried distal digits.

When encountering the YADTT rating "in the wild," both options should be considered before lighting the bonfires of indignation.
Also, if you can think of a better/more appropriate icon than the Do Not Enter sign, PLEASE suggest it, because I'm right there with you that it doesn't really fit, but everything I've come up with so far looks awful once shrunk down to rating badge size.

--Patrick

I am Emrys, Queen of the Doomweasels! Bow down and cower before me, puny humans!

Do I get another "You're doing that thing again" rating?

Dec 3, 2018#21

GasBandit

I'll never accept the forced-meme "secondary" meaning of

. That Pat tried to redefine it to something else was just him, yet again, doing the thing.

It's a "wrong way" sign. As in, you're going the wrong way. Again. On purpose, probably.

Dec 3, 2018#22

PatrThom

Emrys said:
@PatrThom evidently thinks I'm a predator. I can't imagine how he got that idea. </s>

I said no such thing. I merely called you out for liking predators.

GasBandit said:
I'll never accept the forced-meme "secondary" meaning of

. That Pat tried to redefine it to something else was just him, yet again, doing the thing.

We know and remember your intentions. But you’ve got to face reality. That little red ball is all grown up now and ready to strike out on its own, and it no longer feels bound by your expectations. I did not redefine it. We all did. Heck, I wasn’t even the first!

—Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#23

figmentPez

PatrThom said:
However, through common usage,

Citation needed.

Dec 3, 2018#24

Dei

GasBandit said:
I'll never accept the forced-meme "secondary" meaning of

. That Pat tried to redefine it to something else was just him, yet again, doing the thing.

It's a "wrong way" sign. As in, you're going the wrong way. Again. On purpose, probably.

I agree with the secondary meaning. You just don't like it because it gets used on you.

Dec 3, 2018#25

Dei

figmentPez said:
Citation needed.

I'm sure if you look at blots post history at minimum, you'll find people using it that way.

Dec 3, 2018#26

PatrThom

figmentPez said:
Citation needed.

If you are serious and want me to go and find some for you, I will. It won’t be hard (unless a bunch have been depublished). If you like, I can even include the previous instance(s!) where Gas has complained that he never meant for the rating to be used that way. But not until I get home and off mobile.

—Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#27

figmentPez

PatrThom said:
If you are serious and want me to go and find some for you, I will. It won’t be hard (unless a bunch have been depublished). If you like, I can even include the previous instance(s!) where Gas has complained that he never meant for the rating to be used that way. But not until I get home and off mobile.

Well, I was serious, but I'm fine with just siding with Gas and the original intent of the rating. I'm skeptical that people really do use it more in a "yes, you're doing what you're famous for" way, than they use it in a "please stop doing this thing that you do way too often". The fact that Dei cited Blots as an example proves my point. People want Blots to stop doing that shit.

Dec 3, 2018#28

Dei

figmentPez said:
Well, I was serious, but I'm fine with just siding with Gas and the original intent of the rating. I'm skeptical that people really do use it more in a "yes, you're doing what you're famous for" way, than they use it in a "please stop doing this thing that you do way too often". The fact that Dei cited Blots as an example proves my point. People want Blots to stop doing that shit.

Um, you just made a third meaning to the emote if you think Pat is saying that people are using it to praise people. Gas's originally intent was to specifically call out Pat for taking things too literally on purpose. People spread that to using it whenever people did a thing that they usually did and became irritating.

Dec 3, 2018#29

GasBandit

Dec 3, 2018#30

Dei

Poor, poor Gasbandit.

(Also sorry for hijacking your thread @Emrys )

Dec 3, 2018#31

figmentPez

Dei said:
Um, you just made a third meaning to the emote if you think Pat is saying that people are using it to praise people.

So, you're saying Pat doesn't like it when Emry's is the Queen of Doomweasels? Because that's what got this whole thread off-track.

Dec 3, 2018#32

Dei

figmentPez said:
So, you're saying Pat doesn't like it when Emry's is the Queen of Doomweasels? Because that's what got this whole thread off-track.

Well fine, maybe it's Pat that is refusing to acknowledge the negative connotation behind the rating, but I still say the second usage is legit as long as it's meant in a "Please stop doing that annoying thing you do" way. But tbh, using it in anyway besides Pat (or anyone) being overly literal is contrary to Gas's pure vision for it, so he's still wrong.

Dec 3, 2018#33

GasBandit

Dei said:
Pat (or anyone) being overly literal

Pat, Grue, and Bubble were the big three. I think it was some magical unholy perfect storm of them all replying to each other with deliberate misinterpretations that finally inspired me to create the rating.

Dec 3, 2018#34

Bubble181

GasBandit said:
Pat, Grue, and Bubble were the big three. I think it was some magical unholy perfect storm of them all replying to each other with deliberate misinterpretations that finally inspired me to create the rating.

Whoohoo! I've made my mark on history!

Dec 3, 2018#35

PatrThom

1) Doing The Thing
2) Doing Their Thing

I’ll also add that I never really saw it as “That thing you are doing is annoying and I wish you’d stop” so much as “You are again doing that thing you are famous for.”
The only real difference between #1 and #2 above is whether the “you” being referenced above is declared as a global constant (always referring to that one specific person who does The Thing) or as a local variable (referring to the person who received the rating).

—Patrick

Dec 3, 2018#36

blotsfan

Man, I didn't even say anything and I'm being attacked...

That being said, I found this post to be interesting.

GasBandit said:
He was doing the thing, the actual thing - the being intentionally obtuse thing. That wasn't an "I disagree with you" DITA that is so all the rage these days but is incorrect.

Dec 4, 2018#37

Gruebeard

PatrThom said:
I’ll also add that I never really saw it as “That thing you are doing is annoying and I wish you’d stop” so much as “You are again doing that thing you are famous for."

Yeah, this. And of course, this redefining/misinterpretation of the rating was inevitable. I mean, how could I possibly resist the temptation of doing the thing with the doing the thing rating?

Dec 4, 2018#38

Bubble181

I have also, always interpreted the "YDTTA" rating as as "You're doing your thing again (and it's annoying/exaggerated)" rating.
Well, that, or the rating to give a post in the Sex Thread when the poster's returning from an eventful Comic Con.

Dec 4, 2018#39

PatrThom

Bubble181 said:
the rating to give a post in the Sex Thread when the poster's returning from an eventful Comic Con.

So many to choose from, too.
Swamp Thing, Man-Thing*, John Carpenter’s Thing, Addams’ Family, etc.

—Patrick
*not recommended for the easily startled.

Dec 4, 2018#40

Gruebeard

PatrThom said:
. . . John Carpenter’s Thing . . .

That'd be for a poster returning from a movie premiere's cast and crew meet & greet.

Dec 4, 2018#41

Emrys

Hey, I'm just glad that I've got this thing that I evidently do.

And this thread is up to almost 2 pages of non-thread related stuff. I'm loving it! :popcorn:

Dec 4, 2018#42

Gruebeard

Emrys said:
Hey, I'm just glad that I've got this thing that I evidently do.

And this thread is up to almost 2 pages of non-thread related stuff. I'm loving it!

Squeesploding is another thing you do.

I'm surprised @Doomweasel minion doesn't slap the YDDT rating on those posts to discourage you.

Dec 4, 2018#43

Emrys

Gruebeard said:
Squeesploding is another thing you do.

I'm surprised @Doomweasel minion doesn't slap the YDDT rating on those posts to discourage you.

Doomweasel minion knows where his tasty chicken snacks come from.

Dec 4, 2018#44

GasBandit

Forums