Our Lives as Editors of a Predatory Journal: Lessons Learned Publishing a Scholarly Open Access Journal | Against The Grain

Amyluv's bookmarks 2017-11-11


"Most of the workflow is done by email. They are happy with Digital Commons for managing reviewers. Many journals use Beall’s Criteria to detect predatory journals (see the preprint of an article by Olivarez et al for reasons why to use them). CL does not use Beall’s criteria. Emery and Levine-Clark looked at 18 journals in the Web of Science database and found that in almost all cases of scholarship, there were one or two areas where CL could be improved. In some cases, CL was acting like a predatory journal. For example, one of their reviewers detected that an article was already published elsewhere. It was not a malicious intent, just an author wanting wider dissemination of his work, so they had to contact the author and ask that the paper be revised. Articles in many of the early issues of CL do not have DOIs; as a result, CL lost its listing in the DOAJ. CrossRef has been asked to help add the missing DOIs."



From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Amyluv's bookmarks


oa.new oa.journals oa.predatory oa.publishing oa.jif oa.authors oa.rights oa.best_practices oa.recommendations oa.metrics

Date tagged:

11/11/2017, 17:12

Date published:

11/11/2017, 12:11