Beall J
Scholarly Communications Librarian, University of Colorado , US.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016 Feb;98(2):77-9. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0056.
'Continuous effort, not strength or intelligence, is the key to understanding our potential.' Margaret J Wheatley. The focus of any academic or research author is to share his or her findings, and to gain respect and reward for publishing. The ideal journal is one that not only publishes an article quickly but also helps the author to improve the article before publication through peer review, selects only the best research so that the author's article lies alongside other high quality articles, and provides maximum (and long-term) visibility and access to the article. Unfortunately, in the real world, authors need to make tradeoffs between high quality journals, those that work quickly, those that are willing to accept the article and those that provide the best access. Into this mix has come the potential of open access as a means of increasing visibility: journals publish the article without a subscription barrier so anyone, anywhere, can read the article. However, the growth of open access (pushed by institutions, grant bodies and governments as a means of improving human health and knowledge) has come with some unforeseen consequences. In this article, Jeffrey Beall discusses one recent phenomenon that has arisen from the open access movement: that of 'predatory publishers'. These are individuals or companies that use the open access financial system (author pays, rather than library subscribes) to defraud authors and readers by promising reputable publishing platforms but delivering nothing of the sort. They frequently have imaginary editorial boards, do not operate any peer review or quality control, are unclear about payment requirements and opaque about ownership or location, include plagiarised content and publish whatever somebody will pay them to publish. Predatory publishers generally make false promises to authors and behave unethically. They also undermine the scholarly information and publishing environment with a deluge of poor quality, unchecked and invalidated articles often published on temporary sites, thus losing the scholarly record. Jeffrey Beall, a librarian in Denver, US, has watched the rise of such fraudulent practice, and manages a blog site that names publishers and journals that he has identified as predatory. While Beall's lists can provide librarians and knowledgeable authors with information on which journals and publishers to be cautious about, several legitimate publishers, library groups and others have joined forces to educate and inform authors in what to look for when selecting journals to publish in (or read). This initiative, called Think. Check. Submit. (http://thinkchecksubmit.org/), was launched in the latter half of 2015 and hopes to raise awareness of disreputable journals while clearly separating them from valid, high quality, open access journals (of which there are many). PIPPA SMART Guest Editor.
“持续努力,而非力量或智慧,是挖掘自身潜力的关键。”玛格丽特·J·惠特利。任何学术或研究作者的关注点都在于分享其研究成果,并因发表成果而获得尊重和回报。理想的期刊不仅能迅速发表文章,还能通过同行评审在发表前帮助作者改进文章,只挑选最优秀的研究成果,以便作者的文章能与其他高质量文章并列,并且能让文章获得最大程度(且长期)的曝光和获取途径。不幸的是,在现实世界中,作者需要在高质量期刊、发表速度快的期刊、愿意接收文章的期刊以及提供最佳获取途径的期刊之间进行权衡。在这种情况下,开放获取作为一种增加曝光度的方式应运而生:期刊发表文章时没有订阅限制,这样无论任何人在任何地方都能阅读文章。然而,开放获取的发展(受到机构、资助机构和政府推动,作为改善人类健康和知识的一种手段)带来了一些意想不到的后果。在本文中,杰弗里·比尔讨论了开放获取运动中出现的一个近期现象:“掠夺性出版商”现象。这些个人或公司利用开放获取的财务体系(作者付费,而非图书馆订阅)来欺骗作者和读者,他们承诺提供声誉良好的出版平台,但实际上却并非如此。他们常常设有虚构的编辑委员会,不进行任何同行评审或质量控制,付款要求不明确,所有权或所在地不透明,包含抄袭内容,只要有人付费就发表任何东西。掠夺性出版商通常会向作者做出虚假承诺,行为不道德。他们还通过大量质量低劣、未经审核且无效的文章(这些文章常常发表在临时网站上)破坏学术信息和出版环境,从而丢失学术记录。美国丹佛的一位图书馆员杰弗里·比尔见证了这种欺诈行为的兴起,并管理着一个博客网站,该网站列出了他认定为掠夺性的出版商和期刊。虽然比尔的列表可以为图书馆员和知识渊博的作者提供有关哪些期刊和出版商需要谨慎对待的信息,但一些合法的出版商、图书馆团体和其他机构已联合起来,教育并告知作者在选择发表(或阅读)的期刊时应注意什么。这项名为“思考。检查。提交。”(http://thinkchecksubmit.org/)的倡议于2015年下半年发起,希望提高人们对不良期刊的认识,同时将它们与合法、高质量的开放获取期刊(这类期刊有很多)清晰地区分开来。皮帕·斯马特 客座编辑