Skip to main content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.
Factors determining inclusion to the Scholarly Publishing Guide
"How is the JCR Impact Factor [journal citation report] Determined?...Thomson ISI uses a fairly simple formula to determine the JCR Impact Factor. This particular factor is based on the average number of times items published in a particular journal are cited by others. The calculation is based on a three-year period. This means, that it looks at the number of times papers in a journal are cited in the two years following publication. So, an impact factor for 2011 would be figured as follows:
A = Citations in indexed journals during 2011 for articles published in 2009-2010.
B = The total number of articles, notes, papers, reviews and proceedings published in 2009 through 2010.
The 2011 impact factor is figured by dividing A by B. Note that the 2011 impact factor will actually be published in 2012, and the current factor is actually for 2010."
JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR LIST
According to Wikipedia: "The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a measure reflecting the yearly average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factors are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information. Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports."
Here you can check the impact factor of indexed journals for 8+ years, also you can check h-index and SJR impact factor of journals."
The following information is from The University of Cambridge, "Scholarly Publishing LibGuide: "What do we mean by the term 'predatory publisher'?
So-called predatory publishers are a growing phenomenon in the world of academic publishing. There is no one standard definition of what constitutes a predatory publisher but generally they are those publishers who charge a fee for the publication of material without providing the publication services an author would expect such as peer review and editing. Missing out on these important steps can undermine the final product and perpetuates bad research in general and exploits the Open Access publishing model.
Predatory publishers typically contact potential authors directly via email to offer their services and encourage publication with many starting to branch out into offering academic conferences. To the researcher eager to make an impact with their work these can seem like very tempting offers but they often come with little academic reward....Checklist of things to watch out for
For those concerned about the issue of predatory publishing there are number of factors that can be used to assess an individual publisher. Please note: none of these factors should be taken in isolation but used alongside good judgement.
Association membership – if a journal claims to be supporting Open Access then check if it is a member of either the Open Access Scholarly Publishers’ Association (OASPA) or the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). It’s also worth checking if they belong to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which maintains a code of conduct for publishers.
Transparency – a good publisher will be open about their practices with contact information and a mission statement easily found on their website. Check the sending address of any emails carefully and look for spelling or grammatical mistakes but be aware of cultural differences that may explain overly formal language. Exercise caution if the publisher appears to focus on a huge range of topics as this may indicate a for-profit rather than for-research approach
Indexing – appearing in typical indexes and databases for their associated discipline is a good sign for a publisher. However remember that there may be perfectly valid reasons why a particular journal is not indexed such as being very niche or new. Authors could also try searching for other titles from the same publisher to overcome this problem.
Quality of previous publications – assessing previous output from the publisher in question may give an idea of the academic quality of the publication. Check for basic mistakes in spelling or grammar in the work which may indicate a lack of peer review.
Fees – any author fees should be clearly explained prior to publication and be easily accessible to potential authors. Be wary of any ‘hidden’ fees which are raised during the publication process.
Copyright – if the publisher claims to operate under an Open Access model then check whether a Creative Commons of other type of open licence is being applied. The publisher should also be upfront about the rights the author will retain after publication. It is the author’s responsibility to check that these don’t conflict with any funder mandates.
Peer review - the process of the individual journal should be clearly highlighted and guidelines for both authors and reviewers should be easily accessible. Beware of the promise of fast peer review periods as this may indicate a less than through process.
Editorial board – members should be listed, along with a named Editor in Chief. Authors should consider if the names mentioned are recognised experts in the field the publisher is covering. It may also be worth checking the web presence of some members to see if their membership is mentioned elsewhere.
Website quality – check if the website looks professional but be aware of cultural differences. What may look sophisticated to someone from a large UK university may be out of reach of a smaller publisher in another country.
Above all - trust your judgement!
If something doesn’t feel right with the publisher then further investigation is needed. Think of the publishing process as you would online shopping and exercise similar levels of caution – if an online store looks unreliable you are less likely to give them your credit card details until you have investigated further."
Cabells Publishing Directory Blacklist
Cabell's Blacklist Violations
This policy establishes the criteria for identifying deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory journals for inclusion in Cabell's Blacklist. Cabell's Blacklist Review Board uses the following criteria to evaluate all journals suspected of deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory practices.
The following criteria are considered when evaluating a suspected journal:
- The same article appears in more than one journal.
- Hijacked journal (defined as a fraudulent website created to look like a legitimate academic journal for the purpose of offering academics the opportunity to rapidly publish their research for a fee).
- Information received from the journal does not match the journal's website.
- The journal or publisher claims to be a non-profit when it is actually a for-profit company.
- The publisher hides or obscures relationships with for-profit partner companies.
- The owner/Editor of the journal or publisher falsely claims academic positions or qualifications.
- The journal is associated with a conference that has been identified as predatory.
- The journal gives a fake ISSN.
- Insufficient resources are spent on preventing and eliminating author misconduct (that may result in repeated cases of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, image manipulation, etc.).
- The name of the journal references a country or demographic that does not relate to the content or origin of the journal.
- The journal uses language that suggests that it is industry leading, but is in fact a new journal.
- The title of the journal is copied or so similar to that of a legitimate journal that it could cause confusion between the two.
- No editor or editorial board listed on the journal's website at all.
- Editors do not actually exist or are deceased.
- The journal includes scholars on an editorial board without their knowledge or permission.
- The founder of the publishing company is the editor of all of the journals published by said company.
- Evident data showing that the editor/review board members do not possess academic expertise to reasonably qualify them to be publication gatekeepers in the journal's field.
- Have board members who are prominent researchers but exempt them from any contribution to the journal except the use of their names and/or photographs.
- Gender bias in the editorial board.
- Little geographical diversity of board members and claim to be international.
- Inadequate peer review (i.e., a single reader reviews submissions; peer reviewers read papers outside their field of study; etc.).
- The journal's website does not have a clearly stated peer review policy.
- The website does not identify a physical address for the publisher or gives a fake address.
- The journal or publisher uses a virtual office or other proxy business as its physical address.
- The website does not identify a physical editorial address for the journal.
- Dead links.
- Poor grammar and/or spelling.
- No way to contact the journal/only has web-form.
- The journal publishes papers that are not academic at all, e.g. essays by laypeople or obvious pseudo-science.
- No articles are published or the archives are missing issues and/or articles.
- Falsely claims indexing in well-known databases (especially SCOPUS, DOAJ, JCR, and Cabell's).
- Falsely claims universities or other organizations as partners or sponsors.
- Machine-generated or other "sting" abstracts or papers are accepted.
- No copyediting.
- The publisher displays prominent statements that promise rapid publication and/or unusually quick peer review (less than 4 weeks).
- Little geographical diversity of authors and the journal claims to be International.
- Similarly titled articles published by same author in more than one journal.
- The Editor publishes research in his own journal.
- Authors are published several times in the same journal and/or issue.
- The journal purposefully publishes controversial articles in the interest of boosting citation count.
- The journal publishes papers presented at conferences without additional peer review.
- The name of the publisher suggests that it is a society, academy, etc. when it is only a publisher and offers no real benefits to members.
- The name of the publisher suggests that it is a society, academy, etc. when it is only a solitary proprietary operation and does not meet the definition of the term used or implied non-profit mission.
Indexing & Metrics
- The journal uses misleading metrics (i.e., metrics with the words “impact factor” that are not the Thomson Reuters Impact Factor).
- The publisher or its journals are not listed in standard periodical directories or are not widely catalogued in library databases.
- The publisher or journal's website seems too focused on the payment of fees.
- The journal offers options for researchers to prepay APCs for future articles.
- The journal states there is an APC or other fee but does not give information on the amount.
- The journal or publisher offers membership to receive discounts on APCs but does not give information on how to become a member and/or on the membership fees.
- The author must pay APC or publication fee before submitting the article (specifically calls the fee a publication fee, not a submission fee).
- The journal does not indicate that there are any fees associated with publication, review, submission, etc. but the author is charged a fee after submitting a manuscript.
Access & Copyright
- States the journal is completely open access but not all articles are openly available.
- No way to access articles (no information on open access or how to subscribe).
- No policies for digital preservation.
- The journal has a poorly written copyright policy and/or transfer form that does not actually transfer copyright.
- The journal publishes not in accordance with their copyright or does not operate under a copyright license.
- Emails from journals received by researchers who are clearly not in the field the journal covers.
- Multiple emails received from a journal in a short amount of time.
- Emails received from a journal do not include the option to unsubscribe to future emails.
- The journal has been asked to quit sending emails and has not stopped.
- No subscribers / nobody uses the journal.
- The journal or publisher operates in a Western country chiefly for the purpose of functioning as a vanity press for scholars in a developing country.
- The journal's website does not allow web crawlers.
- The journal copyproofs and locks PDFs.