I am still trying to figure out what my new research agenda will be: Jeffrey Beall | Science Chronicle

"Responding to my observation that all his expertise on predatory journal publishing would go waste if he stays away, his anger or frustration with the Open Access advocates became amply evident. 'Well, the Open-Access advocates always criticised my expertise, so perhaps they can work on solving the problem of predatory publishing,' Beall says.

Future plans

'Yes, I still work at the University [of Colorado Denver]. I am still trying to figure out what my new research agenda will be. I have no plans to return to this work [preparing and updating a list of predatory journals and publishers]. I have no plans to create or publish any lists of publishers. I want it to be something much more quiet than predatory publishers. By 'quiet' I mean non-controversial,' he says of his future plans.

Filling the void

To my query on who can fit into his big shoes and match his expertise he says: 'It’s clear that my abandoning this work has left a void. How will the void be filled? The publishing industry already has an initiative, called 'Think, Check, Submit' that was a response to my work, but I am not sure it is having any effect or really addressing the problem.'

Unlike his list, does he think that 'Think, Check, Submit' has any effect at all in exposing and warning people of the dark side of predatory journal publishing and is he aware of any other initiative that matches his? 'Think, Check, Submit is having no effect. I know of no other blacklists. Many of my critics argued that anyone could easily identify predatory journals without the need of any list. They said that predatory journals were obviously predatory, and that my work was unneeded,' Beall comments.

To my comment that his lists helped the scientific community, especially people who did not genuinely know which is a predatory journal, his answer is terse:  'Yes, agree.'"