A couple of years ago, I published in The Kitchen a review of what was then a new product: Cabell’s Blacklist, a directory of journals that are published using questionable, suspicious, or objectively deceitful and dishonest strategies. –For those universities or colleages whose budgets cannot support Cabell’s, I’d suggest developing a set of criteria for what constitutes a predatory journal. The product now functions well in the Safari browser. Each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense. Thank you. Publishers Standalone Journals Vanity Press Contact Other Hello. Our pricing varies based on the size of the institution, duration of the subscription, and of course, the products/disciplines included (i.e. Doesn’t say much for us as a species when it comes to long-term thinking. In June 2020, Cabells changed the name of its whitelist and blacklist to Journalytics and Predatory Reports, respectively. Launched in June 2017, Cabells’ Journal Blacklist is still the only database available to scholars of deceptive and predatory academic journals. I’m not sure I’ve understood your comment 100%, but I can tell you that the criteria for inclusion in the Blacklist have already been revealed. But, that would likely mean libraries would have to be public about supporting blacklists and that would definitely garner a lot of criticism in some quarters. Resources like PLOS One don’t “exist for free”; they’re paid for by people other than readers. Join us to learn more about these and other key resources while getting familiar with the new Cabells brand identity and website interface. Although it is not clear what role/share Cabell´s has in this partnership. Yes, one way to ensure that a journal is legitimate is to see how often it is cited by reputable journals. So what the word “score” means in this context is “assignment to one of the three tiers of severity.” Despite what it says in the “General Information” paragraph at the head of the criteria document, I don’t recall seeing anything like a “score” indicated in any of the entries I looked at from Cabell’s Blacklist. This is kind of crazy: https://www.nber.org/digest-202012/corporate-reporting-era-artificial-intelligence After all, the public is the final user of whatever is derived from scientific endevours and its products (papers are just one of them). Something easily discernible using a citation database to see whether the journal gets cited by serious researchers. Personnel at Cabell’s use a transparent list of over 60 behavioral indicators when screening journals, and they update their criteria as needed. That’s their sole reason for asking. This produces a weighted score that increases with the probability that a journal is engaging in deceptive behaviors. So what good are black or white listings if they are invisible to most? But, I definitely wouldn’t want to see the “author pays” model extended to the Cabell’s list. Journalytics covers more than 3,000 qualified academic journals spanning UNB's 4 accessible business related disciplines ( Accounting, Economics & Finance, Management, and Marketing ) to help researchers select the best match to publish their manuscripts. I suspect the intended parallel to PLOS is that reading is free. I would pay a fee for every manuscript I run through the tool, much like we do for tools like iThenticate. It seems that if Cabell’s came up with a low-cost way for individual authors to run a check whether a short-list of candidate journals had a clean bill, it could open this up to the masses. Just Nobel thoughts you say! It will go out of date soon after – but that is, unfortunately or not, the world we live in. “PRODUCTS”!!! https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0099133318302490. Through careful analysis of these and similar behaviors, we developed a scoring rubric that is applied in the investigation of each journal. But being angry because someone isn’t willing to give their hard work and investment away for free does not solve the problem. The Cabell’s International Blacklist covers approximately 12000 titles, significantly expanding the resources offered to scholars to manage the predatory journal threat. That’s interesting because I think that the blacklist has more obvious value (avoiding losing money to scams) than a whitelist. I still recommend that these be expanded, and would particularly urge Cabell’s to make it possible to search by violation type. International Journal of Chemoinformatics and Chemical Engineering (IJCCE) Show 19 Indices | View Journal. I’m really not sure it’s realistic (to say nothing of fair) to expect Cabell’s to do this work, in the way that they’re doing it, for free. I’m especially wondering if they’re institutions so researchers can actually use it, or if they’re publishers, or other. English editing costs between $200-500 for a 3000 word document depending on the level of . The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a highly regarded, quality-controlled list of reputable open access journals.. DOAJ has been criticized in the past for letting some questionable journals slip onto the list. Cabells' has curated a list of over 11,000 academic journals over 18 disciplines and a 100s of publishers. Do you not see a vested interest there? So we have a white list and a blacklist, but also a gray list. If others follow suit, the publisher will either lower the price or stop providing the service. Disclosure: When Cabell’s was in the early stages of planning for the creation of this product, I did a few hours of paid consulting work for them and later contributed to a Cabell’s-organized conference panel discussion on the topic of predatory publishing. Worse, it’s rather difficult to find the details of that policy unless one is a subscriber to the service — I finally had to ask where it was, at which point I was directed to the question “How do I get a specific journal removed from the Blacklist?” on Cabell’s publicly-facing FAQs page. To what extent does the data in the Cabell’s white list replicate what’s in Ulrich’s? Sorry if that came of differently than I intended. For instance, Beall called out MDPI and Leonid Schneider reported that a Frontiers executive engaged in a sockpuppet anti-Beall campaign (https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.029; and https://forbetterscience.com/2017/09/18/frontiers-vanquishers-of-beall-publishers-of-bunk/). It promised a tool that can be used by authors needing help deciding where to publish, by academics and other employers seeking to check the legitimacy of job applicants’ claimed applications or editorial board memberships, or anyone else interested in monitoring the behavior of deceptive publishers. author fees, advertising, sponsorship, etc.). The value of the whitelist – improved research reputation and attractiveness to funders – is hard to calculate. Well yes, of course. The blacklist is new to the market and it remains unclear if it is a viable product, hence a lower price (at least until it established itself). The cost of all that training, desirable though it may be, would be far greater than the cost of the subscription. (For example, it would be very useful to be able to do a search for journals that falsely claim affiliation with universities or other sponsors, or for journals that hide or misrepresent their practice of charging APCs. Original list. The Blacklist was designed to take the place of the controversial Beall’s List, which had recently shut down after being operated out of the library office of Jeffrey Beall … A quick and easy mechanism by which readers can submit information about journals, Evaluation at the journal level rather than the publisher level, Specific reasons for inclusion provided for each title entry. I don’t grudge them charging something, but US$57,000 per year for access (what our library was quoted) does seem excessive to me. I meant this: “Each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense.” How does it look like in practice? Who’s their target market? As a service increases in demand, so does price and eventually even the best services become inaccessible to many. Are their prices such that an individual author could subscribe at a modest cost before submitting an article, or is it only for institutional subscriptions? Certainly not all that is published in these Gray-Lit journals is bunk, but they seem like pre-prints with the imprimatur of a respectable sounding journal name. More information on how are addressing Rick’s observations, as well as updates on plans going forward can be found in the latest post to our blog, The Source: https://blog.cabells.com/2019/05/08/feedback-loop/, Hear about the impact of our career development programs first hand in the latest episode of our Early Career podcast. But I’m with you on $57K being too much. No, this product is not owned by, nor affiliated with Clarivate. I’m going to take a wild guess that the revenue from these ads is insufficient to cover all of the costs incurred in creating their blacklist and whitelist. Yes, agreed. It would of public interest to find out one way or other early-on. So, unlike some other data sharing portals, I don’t think publisher funding is an option here without a lot of conflict of interest issues. But that’s the whole point: “free to read” creates an illusion of freeness that can be dangerous if it leads people to think that (legitimate) publishing can be done without significant cost. A headline banner costs $2600 for a year (24 issues). Overall, I find the Cabell’s Blacklist product to be a carefully crafted, honestly managed, and highly useful tool for libraries, faculty committees, and authors. Please see beallslist.net. One can see however the value of a product like this for educating folks in any university about predatory practices in scholarly publishing. Presently, I say Good By for now. Predatory journals cheat researchers by charging fees to publish papers but without carrying any peer-review, thus allowing even trash to be published. Authors or institutions? The tool is useful for collection development and for authors. If the journal does not have a publisher use the Standalone Journals list. A total score over 100 is the threshold for including a journal on the Journal Blacklist. The Journal Blacklist allows these key decision-makers to easily and confidently vet the publication records of candidates to ensure important positions and limited funds are protected. Since its founding over 40 years ago, Cabells' services have grown and evolved to include the Journalytics (a searchable, curated database of critical information about verified and reputable academic journals), and the Predatory Reports (the only searchable database that identifies deceptive and fraudulent reports).. –An index of how much a journal gets cited by a heavily cited journal might be a good metric to incorporate into Cabell’s analysis if it is not already there. Currently, we do not offer subscriptions to the Whitelist or Blacklist at an individual level; the majority of our subscribers are academic institutions and pricing varies based on institutional size. PLOS One is by no means a free resource. They offer English editing, journal selection and manuscript formatting. Key components for establishing the Blacklist were objectivity and transparency with respect to the … suggest you ‘may’ be acting as Marketing Agents for selling Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. –It would be good to know the extent of the “grey list” of those journals that don’t appear on the other two lists. I think this misapprehension may be arising because Cabell’s includes a trademark notice at the bottom of some of its webpages regarding the term “Journal Impact Factor” (see, for example, here). For those looking for an OA or “free resource” (although we have to acknowledge that those on charge of maintaining the list have to put their own time and resources) “Stop Predatory Journals is an alternative free listing for those unable to subscribe a paid service. I suspect the intended parallel to PLOS is that reading is free. The Cabells Whitelist includes detailed information on over 11,000 academic journals within 18 disciplines. I am sure it will not be long before somebody hacks it and posts it somewhere for everybody. It means only that the journal no longer meets all of Cabell’s criteria for inclusion in the Whitelist. On June 15, 2017, Cabells launched its own database of academic journals it considers predatory. And there is some gap in the methodology, because there is no clear distinction between the areas Underreviewlist-Blacklist-List-Whitelist. So far, they have been unable to build such a tool, but if they could do it, they could make the list freely available and sell the tool to cover costs. This is the largest database we are aware of … May be it is beyond the comprehension of the Company (which want to sell rather than distribute it freely as a public service) what public service especially for the Academia means. Company could make money by placing paid Advertisements within the Cabell’s Blacklist and other sister publications on the internet. These include: Since my original review, Cabell’s has included a new feature: the ability to download a list of journals that have been removed from the Whitelist. Cabells has now investigated and verified over 10,000 individual titles for inclusion into its Journal Blacklist. The list of journals under review for the Blacklist still includes no indication as to why each title is under review. The common feature of all such journals is that instead of rigorously evaluating and vetting submitted articles, they will instead publish anything submitted as long as the author is willing to pay an article processing charge (APC). ). The idea of having this sort of service performed as a charitable act for the research community is a noble one. to “Minor” (“the website does not identify a physical editorial address for the journal,” “the number of articles published has increased by 25-49% in the last year,” etc.). From the quotes I’ve seen, the blacklist is a lot cheaper than the whitelist. This began to change in 2011, when Cabell’s began developing a set of quality metrics and applying them when considering journals for inclusion in its directory; these metrics were fully implemented in 2013, at which point the directory morphed into a Whitelist; in 2015, Cabell’s removed from its list over 2,000 journals that failed to meet those criteria. May 01st 2019. The price tag for this list is predatory; it does not matter how you spin it. International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN) Show 22 Indices | View Journal. That is why the product exists: it is the least expensive method to date that addresses a very real problem. The very act of ‘unrestricted’ Free Distribution of new List on the Internet will be heralded as ‘Unselfish Service’ to all those aspiring Chemist, Scientists, Engineers and Research Scholars and Academia (who were/are taken advantage of by the ‘money hungry’ Predatory Journals and their Publishers) and will generate GOODWILL which will emotionally COMPENSATE the creator of new list for a long time to come even after when the creator is retired. The first category includes behaviors that directly indicate deception and are weighted heavily as a result. Gasp! As has been discussed elsewhere, the resources necessary to develop, grow, maintain and refine the Journal Blacklist do not allow us to offer this product for free. Think of how useful this tool would be if it was integrated with A&I databases or with document delivery tools. Cabell’s Blacklist Violations Cabell’s blacklist of predatory journals passes 12,000. That shifts the issue away from IFs of citing journals, to author quality or article quality metrics, solely. Predatory publishing, sometimes called write-only publishing or deceptive publishing, is an exploitive academic publishing business model that involves charging publication fees to authors without checking articles for quality and legitimacy and without providing the other editorial and publishing services that legitimate academic journals provide, whether open access or not. In order to be more useful for consumers of published literature Cabells needs create an API or license their data for integration with other content sets. This information should really be thought of as meta-data. A 2015 study by researchers at the Hanken School of Economics in Finland found that “predatory” publishing skyrocketed between 2010 and 2014, during which the number of scholarly articles published in journals on Beall’s list increased nearly tenfold. I did not bother to fill out all the required fields for journal selection to get a quote, but one of them was “What is the desired impact factor range?”. May 2, 2019. Then my editors can raise questions about the reference with the authors. If the price is too high, don’t buy it. Journals on these lists are supported by Open Access organizations like DOAJ, COPE, and OASPA. Cabells' Predatory Reports is a paid subscription service featuring a database of deceptive and predatory journals, and a database of "verified, reputable journals", with details about those journals' acceptance rates and invited article percentages. I have to fully agree with you. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. 60 Thoughts on "Cabell’s Predatory Journal Blacklist: An Updated Review". What might work is a “Subscribe to Open” kind of deal. This scoring system has been designed specifically to ensure that legitimate journals that are new, from developing countries, or are simply low quality, are not classified as ‘predatory’ and included in the Journal Blacklist. Interested readers can see for themselves how severe those infractions were, and thus decide for themselves how concerned they are about publishing with that journal (or how concerned they should be to see a colleague publish in it). “Free” is a price we all love, of course — except when it’s the price offered for our labor. $57K for a yearly subscription for one library is definitely more. What’s Hot and Cooking In Scholarly Publishing, [N.B: As of 2020, this product has been renamed Predatory Reports.]. To me, the so-called predatory publishing issue is worse than it was several years ago with some major players offering what I call “Gray-Lit Journals” that produce articles with a good veneer of reputability: nice layout, doi numbers, in CrossRef, indexed in Google Scholar. The journal is open access but no information is given about how the journal is supported financially (i.e. Yes, totally agree — I don’t see how a publisher-pays/APC-like model could possibly work in this context. However, if the point is to make a profit and fight legal action, it gets a little muddy, does it not? Cabell’s Blacklist is not limited to open access journals, as it includes journals published by the large publishing companies. Its fine that the Whitelist is not comprehensive but there’s a fair number of journals appearing not on white, black, or under review. Publicly accusing a person or business of fraud is serious business, and should not (IMO) be done anonymously. Inclusion criteria are now more carefully crafted, and less likely to sweep fundamentally honest but low-quality/low-resource journals into the same net as genuinely fraudulent ones. The model makes no sense at all on so many levels that it’s not really worth considering. Access to the white list has been provided as a method for our staff and faculty to identify safe and reputable publishers for their papers. Thus, the introduction of Cabell’s Blacklist in 2017 was a welcome development. Don’t Miss Your Chance to Participate in the SSP 2021 Annual Meeting! So I appreciate David Crotty’s points that the black and white listing services can’t be free because publishers that get unfavorable reports will make life hard for the reporter. You got my point? The Cabell’s journal directory assists authors in their publication journey by providing an interactive, searchable database which covers 18 distinct academic disciplines from more than ten thousand international scholarly journals. Hello Mr. David, You too are defending the company who wants to make money off those PhD Students, Research Scholars and universities in Poor and Under-develop Countries!!! Cabells’ Whitelist of ca. Cabell’s identifies questionable journals based on 65 behavioural indicators. While I am glad a new, more rigorously policed resource exists for academics without the time or know-how to check for legitimate publications, I am concerned that it is a subscription based service. The Blacklist was designed to take the place of the controversial Beall’s List, which had recently shut down after being operated out of the library office of Jeffrey Beall for about five years. These include: The only new problem I encountered was the fact that each entry no longer includes a direct link to Cabell’s appeals policy. Those interested in a quote should contact sales@cabells.com.). We continue to explore alternative models of pricing/access in an effort to make our services as widely available as possible. It would be good if someone from Cabell’s were to speak up here. Cabells’ Journal Blacklist is the only searchable database of deceptive and fraudulent journals with comprehensive reports detailing violations. “Advanced” searches no longer routinely fail, sending the user back to the Blacklist home page. I’ve asked for a quote for my Russian university a couple of months ago. –I entirely agree that a quality product costs money. However as we saw from Beall’s efforts (highly flawed efforts, by the way — see https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/16/parting-company-with-jeffrey-beall/ and https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/08/10/defending-regional-excellence-in-research-or-why-beall-is-wrong-about-scielo/ ), it does not seem to be a feasible activity without significant financial backing. GENERAL INFORMATION. Was that quote for the whitelist, the blacklist or the combination? Such listings can’t be taken at face value. Now we have Blacklist, Whitelist and the list of journals which are being considered as the ones to be included in the Blacklist. Editage, aims to accelerate global scientific research communication. As long as the costs incurred go towards fighting potential legal issues, then that is fine with me. Particularly the part where the author declares: I have no ongoing financial relationship with Cabell’s and no financial interest in the company. And for those who question the necessity of such a tool, it’s worth noting that Cabell’s Blacklist currently includes almost 12,000 journals — and its list of titles under consideration for inclusion in the Blacklist comes to over 1,000 more. Joseph, This seems to have gone off the rails a bit. is this not just another attempt to commodify academia (despite best intentions)? This product is owned by Clarivate, correct? Companies have learned to use (or exclude) certain words to make their corporate filings be interpreted more positively by financial ML algorithms. (Whether it represents good value for money is a separate question, one that can’t be answered here because pricing is negotiated on a case-by-case basis. So, your once again defending this company would not go well with those students, researchers and universities around the world. I firmly believe the answer is education/training of present and future scholars. Ah, thanks. Oh, and selling online advertisements to cover costs is not a realistic business model. Nothing in this world is free. Cabell’s has a third product beside the “Whitelist” and “Blacklist”, namely “Author Services” https://cabells.editage.com/. —— BEALLSLIST.NET —— BEALL'S LIST OF PREDATORY JOURNALS AND PUBLISHERS. As someone who works for a living, I expect to get paid for my work, and I don’t begrudge anyone else the same. We have defined standards for journal publication quality. Regards. To end this discussion — I’m happy this product exists, because otherwise, post-Beall, no such list seems to have arisen. This would be a self-defeating strategy. If the New York Times’ market is too small for them to be sustainable using an online advertising business model, then I suspect that might tell you something about how a specialized product for a tiny market might fare. To Support Customers in Easily and Affordably Obtaining the Latest Peer-Reviewed Research, Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), International Journal of 3-D Information Modeling (IJ3DIM), International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI), International Journal of Adaptive, Resilient and Autonomic Systems (IJARAS), International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), International Journal of Advanced Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (IJAPUC), International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems (IJATS), International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems (IJAEIS), International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI), International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics (IJABE), International Journal of Applied Evolutionary Computation (IJAEC), International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research (IJAGR), International Journal of Applied Industrial Engineering (IJAIE), International Journal of Applied Logistics (IJAL), International Journal of Applied Management Sciences and Engineering (IJAMSE), International Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computing (IJAMC), International Journal of Art, Culture and Design Technologies (IJACDT), International Journal of Artificial Life Research (IJALR), International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), International Journal of Aviation Systems, Operations and Training (IJASOT), International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education (IJBIDE), International Journal of Big Data and Analytics in Healthcare (IJBDAH), International Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Engineering (IJBCE), International Journal of Business Analytics (IJBAN), International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN), International Journal of Business Intelligence Research (IJBIR), International Journal of Chemoinformatics and Chemical Engineering (IJCCE), International Journal of Civic Engagement and Social Change (IJCESC), International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing (IJCAC), International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence (IJCINI), International Journal of Computational Methods in Heritage Science (IJCMHS), International Journal of Computational Models and Algorithms in Medicine (IJCMAM), International Journal of Computer Vision and Image Processing (IJCVIP), International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), International Journal of Computers in Clinical Practice (IJCCP), International Journal of Conceptual Structures and Smart Applications (IJCSSA), International Journal of Corporate Finance and Accounting (IJCFA), International Journal of Creative Interfaces and Computer Graphics (IJCICG), International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management (IJCRMM), International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education (IJCEE), International Journal of Cyber Warfare and Terrorism (IJCWT), International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining (IJDWM), International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST), International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics (IJDCF), International Journal of Digital Innovation in the Built Environment (IJDIBE), International Journal of Digital Library Systems (IJDLS), International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence (IJDLDC), International Journal of Disaster Response and Emergency Management (IJDREM), International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), International Journal of Distributed Artificial Intelligence (IJDAI), International Journal of Distributed Systems and Technologies (IJDST), International Journal of E-Adoption (IJEA), International Journal of E-Business Research (IJEBR), International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), International Journal of E-Entrepreneurship and Innovation (IJEEI), International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC), International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), International Journal of Embedded and Real-Time Communication Systems (IJERTCS), International Journal of Energy Optimization and Engineering (IJEOE), International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP), International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA), International Journal of Ethics in Digital Research and Scholarship (IJEDRS), International Journal of Fog Computing (IJFC), International Journal of Food and Beverage Manufacturing and Business Models (IJFBMBM), International Journal of Fuzzy System Applications (IJFSA), International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations (IJGCMS), International Journal of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering (IJGEE), International Journal of Green Computing (IJGC), International Journal of Grid and High Performance Computing (IJGHPC), International Journal of Handheld Computing Research (IJHCR), International Journal of Healthcare Delivery Reform Initiatives (IJHDRI), International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics (IJHISI), International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), International Journal of Hyperconnectivity and the Internet of Things (IJHIoT), International Journal of ICT Research and Development in Africa (IJICTRDA), International Journal of ICT Research in Africa and the Middle East (IJICTRAME), International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), International Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human Development (IJICTHD), International Journal of Information Retrieval Research (IJIRR), International Journal of Information Security and Privacy (IJISP), International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD), International Journal of Information Systems and Social Change (IJISSC), International Journal of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management (IJISSCM), International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (IJISCRAM), International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS), International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach (IJITSA), International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering (IJITWE), International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies (IJIIT), International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies (IJICST), International Journal of Interdisciplinary Telecommunications and Networking (IJITN), International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG), International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science (IJKSS), International Journal of Knowledge Discovery in Bioinformatics (IJKDB), International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), International Journal of Knowledge Society Research (IJKSR), International Journal of Knowledge-Based Organizations (IJKBO), International Journal of Library and Information Services (IJLIS), International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME), International Journal of Materials Forming and Machining Processes (IJMFMP), International Journal of Measurement Technologies and Instrumentation Engineering (IJMTIE), International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), International Journal of Mobile Computing and Multimedia Communications (IJMCMC), International Journal of Mobile Devices, Wearable Technology, and Flexible Electronics (IJMDWTFE), International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction (IJMHCI), International Journal of Monitoring and Surveillance Technologies Research (IJMSTR), International Journal of Multimedia Data Engineering and Management (IJMDEM), International Journal of Natural Computing Research (IJNCR), International Journal of Online Marketing (IJOM), International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design (IJOPCD), International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes (IJOSSP), International Journal of Operations Research and Information Systems (IJORIS), International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence (IJOCI), International Journal of People-Oriented Programming (IJPOP), International Journal of Pharmaceutical Engineering and Drug Design (IJPEDD), International Journal of Privacy and Health Information Management (IJPHIM), International Journal of Productivity Management and Assessment Technologies (IJPMAT), International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), International Journal of Public and Private Perspectives on Healthcare, Culture, and the Environment (IJPPPHCE), International Journal of Public Health Management and Ethics (IJPHME), International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education (IJQAETE), International Journal of Quantitative Structure-Property Relationships (IJQSPR), International Journal of Reliable and Quality E-Healthcare (IJRQEH), International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management (IJRCM), International Journal of Robotics Applications and Technologies (IJRAT), International Journal of Rough Sets and Data Analysis (IJRSDA), International Journal of Secure Software Engineering (IJSSE), International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems (IJSSS), International Journal of Smart Education and Urban Society (IJSEUS), International Journal of Social and Organizational Dynamics in IT (IJSODIT), International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (IJSKD), International Journal of Software Innovation (IJSI), International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI), International Journal of Standardization Research (IJSR), International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences (IJSDS), International Journal of Strategic Engineering (IJoSE), International Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), International Journal of Surface Engineering and Interdisciplinary Materials Science (IJSEIMS), International Journal of Sustainable Economies Management (IJSEM), International Journal of Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility (IJSECSR), International Journal of Swarm Intelligence Research (IJSIR), International Journal of Synthetic Emotions (IJSE), International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA), International Journal of Systems and Service-Oriented Engineering (IJSSOE), International Journal of Systems and Society (IJSS), International Journal of Systems and Software Security and Protection (IJSSSP), International Journal of Systems Biology and Biomedical Technologies (IJSBBT), International Journal of Teacher Education and Professional Development (IJTEPD), International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM), International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD), International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management in the Digital Age (IJTHMDA), International Journal of User-Driven Healthcare (IJUDH), International Journal of Vehicular Telematics and Infotainment Systems (IJVTIS), International Journal of Virtual and Augmented Reality (IJVAR), International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), International Journal of Virtual Communities and Social Networking (IJVCSN), International Journal of Web Portals (IJWP), International Journal of Web Services Research (IJWSR), International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), International Journal of Wireless Networks and Broadband Technologies (IJWNBT), International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), Journal of Cases on Information Technology (JCIT), Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), Journal of Nanotoxicology and Nanomedicine (JNN), Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), Copyright © 1988-2020, IGI Global - All Rights Reserved, Additionally, Enjoy an Additional 5% Pre-Publication Discount on all Forthcoming Reference Books. I’ve had no further involvement in the project, and I have no ongoing financial relationship with Cabell’s and no financial interest in the company. It must be highlighted heres that not every one as individual especially those university PhD Research Students, Research Scholars, and as orgainzation such as most Universities in the under-developed and poor countries would not be able afford to subscribe such paid subscription of list. You may continue defending this company but sooner global scientific community will not have reason believe you anymore. THE JOURNAL WHITELIST. Help preventing publications of meticuously carried out research in any predatory journal and fake journals is Nobel thing to do as Distinguished Prof. Jefferry Beall did in his tenunre at the university. One answer to that is whether any experts in their field takes the journal seriously. The Journal Blacklist Review Board uses the following criteria to evaluate all journals suspected of deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory practices. : As of 2020, this product is now called Predatory Reports.] #GivingTuesday That really is the trade-off, isn’t it? If you want a free list, then I would ask you where you will find the legal and financial support for the efforts, and how much of your own unpaid time you’re willing to devote to running it and dealing with these issues. A very quick summary for those who may — against all odds — still be blissfully unaware of what terms like “predatory publishing or “deceptive publishing” refer to: what are commonly called predatory publishers are those who lie about their business practices for the purpose of attracting paying authors. Each category carries with it a range of scores. The author of the page declare: “After Jeffrey Beall took down his list of predatory journals in January 2017 in order to avoid continued harassment and threats, a small group of scholars and information professionals decided to anonymously rebuild and resurrect that list.” https://predatoryjournals.com/about/ I guess that this might generate more revenue. The constant harassment and lawsuits are the reason why no one picked up his efforts when his university finally pulled the plug (said to have happened due to mounting lawsuit threats from Frontiers). Unfortunately, not every researcher who publishes in a predatory journal is tricked into doing so. I linked to those criteria in my review, but for your convenience here’s the link again. This information needs to be easier to find. In 2014, they undertook a significant overhaul requiring all journals … A journal website with spelling and grammar errors wouldn’t accumulate many points, for example, but evidence of plagiarized articles or … The index in each Directory helps you match the characteristics of your manuscript to the topic areas the journal emphasizes, as well as bibliometrics, journal ranking and acceptance rate. Journal Blacklist violations are placed in one of three categories (Severe, Moderate, Minor) based on the level of severity and how directly they relate to deceptive behavior. The inclusion criteria are now categorized in tiers, from “Severe” (“the journal gives a fake ISSN,” “editors do not actually exist or are deceased,” etc.) Most notably, these include: In addition to these important strengths, I can now report that some the problems I reported in 2017 have been resolved. It’s only going to get worse with Plan S pressure to go all Gold. Think how useful it would be as a Crossref data point. And is it possible to be included in the Blacklist only on account of the criteria of, for example, MODERATE group? The editing service is run by Cabell´s India-based partner company Editage/Cactus Communications. Did you read the entire post? (This was actually true of Beall’s List, too: it was paid for by Beall and–to the degree that he used UCD resources to develop and support it–his employer.). Cabells has announced it has reviewed and added the 12,000 th publication to its Journal Blacklist.This is a significant milestone as Cabells has now tripled the number of deceptive and fraudulent journals in the Blacklist since it was launched in 2017.The additional journals offer its global user base even greater depth of resources to validate publication outlets for academic researchers. By injecting non-vetted content into the scholarly and scientific marketplace and misrepresenting it as peer-reviewed science, these journals contaminate and undermine both the legitimacy and the trustworthiness of scholarly discourse. The advanced search feature is still insufficiently advanced, only offering the most basic search options. The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is to advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking. I am amused by this thread. It seems Yours constant defending this publishing company of Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. I am not sure those of us from developing countries, especially Africa can afford these charges. Most probably you are right. For those asking that this list be made freely available, it’s worth considering why the previous Beall’s list was discontinued. Beall’s List had offered a mixed bag of benefits and problems from the start, and Cabell’s (publisher of a long-respected serials directory) sought to create a more rigorous and consistent version of the same service. Interesting effect of the Nature APC program ... it's clearly causing a number of OA advocates to reflect on their support for OA via APCs. –The concept that was suggested about integrating Cabell rankings into A and I sources sounds as if it is worth exploring. He has worked previously as a bibliographer for YBP, Inc., as Head Acquisitions Librarian for the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, as Director of Resource Acquisition at the University of Nevada, Reno, and as Associate Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication at the University of Utah. That’s not spin; it’s a correction of misinformation. We all know the journals that matter to our professions. Or is this apples and oranges? I’m not sure where you took that quote from (“each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense”) — it’s not from my review. Hi everyone. Go to update. I wish there was a list of journals that had been investigated but not added to the Blacklist. Likewise, not all government or granting agencies, responsible for dispersing limited research funds, are experts in the field(s) under consideration. I am not aware of any. The programs are not possible without your support. Further, where would Cabell’s display such ads, and who would those advertisers be? Not all administrators and department heads are experts in each field for which they must review candidates to hire, promote or tenure. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.017 Cabell's Scholarly Analytics helps you to determine which journals typically publish manuscripts similar to yours or could be the best fit for your manuscript. Cabell’s doesn’t assign scores to its various inclusion criteria, though it does categorize the criteria as either “minor,” “moderate,” or “severe.” So in practice, what it looks like is that each entry for a blacklisted includes language that says which of the criteria led to its blacklisting. Besides the Blacklist, the Cabell’s also publishes a Whitelist of journals, and both the lists can be accessed for a fee at the company’s website, www.cabells.com.