Email invitations to publish: Academically sound (such as SAFP) versus potentially predatory journals.

BACKGROUND

Researchers increasingly receive invitations by email to publish. We analysed email publication invitations received by staff members of the Department of Biostatistics, University of the Free State (UFS), comparing emails relating to accredited and non-accredited journals.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included all publication invitations received via UFS email accounts by staff members from May 2023 to July 2023. The researchers independently completed the data form, then checked and resolved any discrepancies.

RESULTS

Of the 93 distinct emails received from 88 journals, only 15 (16%) were received from a journal appearing on the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) accredited journal lists. These included South African Family Practice (SAFP) and the African Journal of Primary Health Care and Family Medicine (PHCFM). Emails from non-accredited journals were significantly (p  0.01) less likely to refer to a journal with a health sciences-related title (37% vs. 86%), indicate the publisher (36% vs. 93%), provide a link to the journal website (59% vs. 100%), state a full physical address (24% vs. 80%), refer to author instructions (21% vs. 47%) or request the recipient to share the email with colleagues (5% vs. 47%). Emails from non-accredited journals were significantly (p  0.01) more likely to contain grammatical errors (63% vs. 0%) and flattering remarks regarding the recipient or his or her research work (49% vs. 0%), and to indicate the journal's International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) (67% vs. 13%).

CONCLUSION

Clear differences were found between email invitations from accredited versus non-accredited journals.Contribution: The findings provide insight into warning signals in email publication invitations.