Evolution of Scientific Productivity on Predatory Journals: A Scientometric Study

References

• Agheorghiesei, M., and A.-M. Bercu. 2022. “Ethical Behaviour in HEIS. An Exploratory Study from Students Perspective.” Applied Research in Administrative Sciences 3 (2). https://doi.org/10.24818/aras/2022/3/2.01.
   Google Scholar
• Aria, M., and C. Cuccurullo. 2017. “Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis.” Journal of Informetrics 11 (4): 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagues, M., M. Sylos-Labini, and N. Zinovyeva. 2019. “A Walk on the Wild Side: ‘Predatory’ Journals and Information Asymmetries in Scientific Evaluations.” Research Policy 48 (2): 462–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker, T. H., D. Pollock, J. C. Stone, M. Klugar, A. M. Scott, C. Stern, R. Wiechula, et al. 2023. “How Should We Handle Predatory Journals in Evidence Synthesis? A Descriptive Survey-Based Cross-Sectional Study of Evidence Synthesis Experts.” Research Synthesis Methods 14 (3): 370–381. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrow, J. M., G. D. Brannan, and P. B. Khandhar. 2022. “Research Ethics.” In StatPearls, Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459281/.
   Google Scholar
• Beall, J. 2012. “Predatory Publishers are Corrupting Open Access.” Nature 489 (7415): 179–179. https://doi.org/10.1038/489179a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beall, J. 2017. “What I Learned from Predatory Publishers.” Biochemia Medica 27 (2): 273–278. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, M. 2017. “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Predatory Publishing but Were Afraid to Ask.” https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Everything-You-Ever-Wanted-to-Know-About-Predatory-Berger/b362ca6779ce3426333a3812a0d7c08957836e26.
   Google Scholar
• Bohannon, J. 2013. “Who’s Afraid of Peer Review?” Science 342 (6154): 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6154.60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, D. 2013. “Investigating Journals: The Dark Side of Publishing.” Nature 495 (7442): 433–435. https://doi.org/10.1038/495433a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuschieri, S. 2022. “Understanding Research Ethics.” In A Roadmap to Successful Scientific Publishing: The Dos, the Don’ts and the Must-Knows, edited by S. Cuschieri, 27–34. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99295-8_2.
   Google Scholar
• da Silva, T., and A. Jaime. 2021. “Paper Mills and On-Demand Publishing: Risks to the Integrity of Journal Indexing and Metrics.” Medical Journal Armed Forces India 77 (1): 119–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2020.08.003.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dinis-Oliveira, R. J. 2021. “Predatory Journals and Meetings in Forensic Sciences: What Every Expert Needs to Know About This ‘Parasitic’ Publishing Model.” Forensic Sciences Research 6 (4): 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2021.1989548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duc, N. M., D. Vinh Hiep, P. Minh Thong, L. Zunic, M. Zildzic, D. Donev, S. M. Jankovic, I. Hozo, and I. Masic. 2020. “Predatory Open Access Journals Are Indexed in Reputable Databases: A Revisiting Issue or an Unsolved Problem.” Medical Archives 74 (4): 318–322. https://doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2020.74.318-322.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elliott, T., B. Fazeen, A. Asrat, A. María Cetto, S. Eriksson, L. Meng Looi, and D. Negra. 2022. “Perceptions on the Prevalence and Impact of Predatory Academic Journals and Conferences: A Global Survey of Researchers.” Learned Publishing 35 (4): 516–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore, S. A., and E. H. Weston. 2020. “Predatory Journals: What They are and How to Avoid Them.” Toxicologic Pathology 48 (4): 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192623320920209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Else, H., and R. Van Noorden. 2021. “The Fight Against Fake-Paper Factories That Churn Out Sham Science.” Nature 591 (7851): 516–519. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00733-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman, P. J. 1996. “An Introduction to Research Ethics.” Science and Engineering Ethics 2 (4): 443–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02583931.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Graf, C. 2022. “Tackling Paper Mills and Bogus Research: Some Things are Better Done Together | Advancing Discovery | Springer Nature.” Research Publishing (blog). April 28, 2022. https://www.springernature.com/gp/advancing-discovery/springboard/blog/blogposts-trust-integrity/tackling-paper-mills-and-bogus-research/20352610.
   Google Scholar
• Grudniewicz, A., D. Moher, K. D. Cobey, G. L. Bryson, S. Cukier, K. Allen, C. Ardern, et al. 2019. “Predatory Journals: No Definition, No Defence.” Nature 576 (7786): 210–212. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurnani, B., and K. Kaur. 2021. “Avoiding Predatory Publishing for Early-Career Ophthalmologists.” Indian Journal of Ophthalmology 69 (12): 3719–3725. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1639_21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammett, D., L. Jackson, and R. Bramley. 2022. “Beyond ‘Do No Harm’? On the Need for a Dynamic Approach to Research Ethics.” Area 54 (4): 582–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivana, H. G., and M. Guskić. 2019. “Croatian Scientists’ Awareness of Predatory Journals.” International Journal for Educational Integrity 15 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0041-5.
   Google Scholar
• Kay, E. 2022. “What Is Research?” Evidence-Based Dentistry 23 (3): 88–88. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-022-0820-3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Khedkar, E. B., A. Kumar, A. Ingle, R. Khaire, J. M. Paliwal, D. Bagul, S. Warpade, et al. 2022. “Study of the Causes and Consequences of Cloned Journal Publications.” Publishing Research Quarterly 38 (3): 558–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09907-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, M. 2022. “Scientific Integrity: Towards a New Disciplinary Field to Prevent Misconduct?” médecine/sciences 38 (4): 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2022045.
   Google Scholar
• Kumbharjuvenkar, R., and B. Mandrekar. 2021. “Predatory Journals: Threat for Academicians.” Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal). June 9. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Flibphilprac%2F5710&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages.
   Google Scholar
• Lievore, C., P. Rubbo, C. B. dos Santos, C. Tânia Picinin, and L. Alberto Pilatti. 2021. “Research Ethics: A Profile of Retractions from World Class Universities.” Scientometrics 126 (8): 6871–6889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03987-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macháček, V., and M. Srholec. 2022. “Predatory Publishing in Scopus: Evidence on Cross-Country Differences.” Quantitative Science Studies 3 (3): 859–887. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00213.
   Google Scholar
• Mathew, R. P., V. Patel, and G. Low. 2022. “Predatory Journals- the Power of the Predator versus the Integrity of the Honest.” Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology 51 (5): 740–746. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2021.07.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, R. L. 2016. “A Short History of Research Ethics.” In Psychological Specialties in Historical Context: Enriching the Classroom Experience for Teachers and Students, 33–46. Washington, DC: Society for the Teaching of Psychology. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-41336-002.
   Google Scholar
• Pandey, N. K., and B. Nath Pandey. 2022. “Authorship and Collaboration Pattern of SRELS Journal During 2016–2020: Scientometrics Mapping 2016-2020: Scientometrics Mapping.” International Journal of Research in Library Science 8 (1): 249. https://doi.org/10.26761/IJRLS.8.1.2022.1515.
   Google Scholar
• Panjikaran, L., and A. Mathew. 2020. “Awareness of Predatory Publishing.” ESMO Open 5 (2): e000677. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, C., and B.-C. Björk. 2015. “‘Predatory’ Open Access: A Longitudinal Study of Article Volumes and Market Characteristics.” BMC Medicine 13 (1): 230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sorensen, M. P., T. Ravn, A. Marušić, A. Reyes Elizondo, P. Kavouras, J. K. Tijdink, and A.-K. Bendtsen. 2021. “Strengthening Research Integrity: Which Topic Areas Should Organisations Focus On?” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 8 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00874-y.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tang, L., G. Hu, Y. Sui, Y. Yang, and C. Cao. 2020. “Retraction: The ‘Other Face’ of Research Collaboration?” Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (3): 1681–1708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00209-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taraswi, B., K. Partin, and D. B. Resnik. 2022. “Authorship Issues When Articles are Retracted Due to Research Misconduct and Then Resubmitted.” Science and Engineering Ethics 28 (4): 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00386-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Office of Research Integrity, “Federal Policies.” n.d. U.S Department of Human Health & Human Services. Accessed October 30, 2022. https://ori.hhs.gov/content/chapter-2-research-misconduct-federal-policies.
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, J. E., and R. Tandon. 2018. “Learning Research Ethics; Why it Matters.” Asian Journal of Psychiatry 34 (April): A2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2018.04.038.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xia, J., J. L. Harmon, K. G. Connolly, R. M. Donnelly, M. R. Anderson, and H. A. Howard. 2015. “Who Publishes in ‘Predatory’ Journals?” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66 (7): 1406–1417. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar