Most highly cited article is to a retracted paper
A journal has published 14 papers on predatory publishing. It’s most cited paper on this topic has been retracted. We ask some questions about this.
A journal has published 14 papers on predatory publishing. It’s most cited paper on this topic has been retracted. We ask some questions about this.
“Cyllage City COVID-19 Outbreak Linked to Zubat Consumption” is a spoof paper that was accepted and published in a peer reviewed journal. The paper even contained the sentence “Epidemiologists believe it highly likely that a journal publishing this paper does not practice peer review and must therefore be predatory”.
We argue that scholarly publishers should bear some of the cost in developing tools to detect AI generated content.
We give a number of tips to enable you to avoid reviewing for a predatory journal.
If you are new to Predatory Publishing, we suggest three Open Access articles that you might find useful as a gentle introduction.
We outline a new direction for this web site (and our Twitter feed). We will still focus on predatory publishing but will also have a much wider coverage.
MDPI have had their flagship journal delisted from Clarivate’s Web of Science. Is the reason due to the rapid increase in the number of papers it publishes. We look at the journal that was delisted.
Under the guise of an advent calendar, we have been listing the most highly cited papers that have addressed predatory publishing. Here we present the full list.
We discuss some of these issues and ask if there is an alternative way of classifying a predatory publisher/journal and, at least, start a discussion as to how these ideas could be developed.
We have noticed that the nursing discipline does seem to over-represented in predatory publishing. We investigate whether this is the case or not.