medigraphic.com
ISSN 2307-2113 (Electronic)
Revista Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud (ACIMED)

2016, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Revista Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud (ACIMED) 2016; 27 (3)

Predatory scientific publishing: an academic plague

Silva ALC

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 420-428
PDF size: 69.64 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The problem of the so called "predatory scientific journals" is examined. This is a rather recent phenomenon that has emerged following the new forms of scientific communication, whose ominous consequences remain largely ignored by ample sectors of the scientific community. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the knowledge of the existence of this trouble and its fundamental consequences. The tactics and the effects of this lucrative stream and the reasons why the scientific community consider it as a factual academic plague that depreciate both, the prestige of scientists and science itself, are detailed exposed.


REFERENCES

  1. Silva Ayçaguer LC. Acerca de una modalidad editorial espuria. Rev Cubana Informa Cienc Sal. 2012;23(1):73-7.

  2. Silva Ayçaguer LC. Un fin de año turbulento para la comunicación científica. Rev Cubana Informa Cienc Sal. 2014;25(1):1-3.

  3. Silva Ayçaguer LC. Luces iniciales y sombras actuales del "acceso abierto": una mirada desde los países en desarrollo. Rev Cubana Informa Cienc Sal. 2014;27(2):118-21.

  4. Butler D. Investigating journals: The dark side of publishing. Nature. 2013;495(7442):433-5.

  5. Melero R, Abad F. Revistas open access: características, modelos económicos y tendencias. En: BiD, textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentació. 2008 [citado 28 de junio de 2016];(20). Disponible en: http://www.ub.edu/bid/20meler2.htm

  6. Bohannon J. Who's Afraid of Peer Review. Science. 2014;342(6154):60-5.

  7. Directory of Open Access Journals. DOAJ's response to the recent article in Science entitled "Who's Afraid of Peer Review?". DOAJ; 2014[citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=news&nId=315&uiLanguage=en

  8. Directory of Open Access Journals. Second response to the Bohannon article. DOAJ; 2015 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=news&nId=317&uiLanguage=en

  9. Michaels D. Doubt is their product. How industry's assault on science threatens your health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.

  10. Silva Ayçaguer LC. Manufacturing doubts about Open Access. Economía y Salud. 2015 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016];Dic Nº 78. Disponible en: http://www.aes.es/boletines/news.php?idB=19&idN=1278

  11. Beall J. Is SciELO a publication favela? Scholarly Open Access. 2015 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: http://scholarlyoa.com/2015/07/30/is-scielo-apublication- favela/

  12. Jeffrey Beall. Nota de repudio al artículo "Is SciELO a Publication Favela?" Scientific Electronic Library Online. 2015 [citado 2 de abril de 2016]. Disponible en: http://blog.scielo.org/es/2015/08/25/nota-de-repudio-al-articulo-is-scielo-apublication- favela-de-autoria-del-sr-jeffrey-beall/

  13. Jan Velterop J. Are "predatory" journals completely negative, or also a sign of something positive? Blog; 2016 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: http://blog.scielo.org/en/2016/02/02/are-predatory-journals-completely-negativeor- also-a-sign-of-something-positive/

  14. Beall J. List of publishers. Scholarly Open Access; 2016 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/01/05/bealls-list-of-predatorypublishers- 2016/

  15. Crawford W. Intersections: Ethics and Access 1: The Sad Case of Jeffrey Beall. Cites and Insights: Crawford at Large. 2014;14:1-14.

  16. Kolata G. Scientific articles. Diario The New York Times, 7 de abril de 2013 [citado 25 de enero de 2016]. Disponible en: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-ofpseudo- academia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

  17. Sorrell J, Owens J. Ethics: Predatory publishing: Keeping the wolves from your office door. Onl J Iss Nurs. 2015 [citado 2 de junio de 2016];20(3). Disponible en: htpp://www.nursingworld.org

  18. Artículo. Say no to predatory journals. 2015 [citado 20 de marzo de 2016]. Disponible en: http://www.uis.no/library/news/say-no-to-predatory-journalsarticle92079- 9658.html

  19. Sterne J. Why you shouldn't publish with Lap Lambert. German Publishing House; 2012 [citado 7 de abril de 2015]. Disponible en: http://superbon.net/?p=2234

  20. Tin L, Ivana B, Biljana B, Ljubica I, Dragan M, Dušan S. Predatory and fake scientific journals/publishers-a global outbreak with rising trend: A review. Geograp Pann. 2014;18(3):69-81.

  21. Shen C. Björk B. "Predatory" open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Medicine. 2015;13:230.

  22. Dadkhah M, Bianciardi G. Ranking predatory journals: Solve the problem instead of removing it! Adv Pharm Bull. 2016;6(1):1-4.

  23. Jalalian M, Mahboobi H. Hijacked journals and predatory publishers: Is there a need to re-think how to assess the quality of academic research? Wal J Sci Technol. 2014;11(5):389-4.

  24. Young NS, Ioannidis JPA, Al-Ubaydli O. Why current publication practices may distort science. PLoS Med. 2008;5(10):e201.

  25. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124.

  26. Ioannidis JPA. How to make more published research true. PLoS Med. 2014;11(10):e1001747.

  27. Silva Ayçaguer LC. La meta-investigación: en defensa del rigor y la transparencia informativa. Rev Cubana Inform Cienc Sal. 2015;26(2):92-3.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com