Revisiting the Term Predatory Open Access Publishing - Journal of Korean Medical Science

Since the 1990s, scholarly publishing has been transformed from subscription print-based paradigm to an open access and digital publishing model, but this transformation has been accompanied by unethical and predatory publishing practices.1, 2 ‘Pay-to-publish’ predatory journals abuse the open-access publishing model, and their main intention is to make money out of authors for their editor–owners.3, 4 The defining characteristic of predatory journals is the lack of a proper peer review process, despite their claims to the contrary.4 The spectrum of victims of predatory journals varies widely and includes inexperienced, early-career and naive researchers from both developing and high- to upper middle-income countries, together with experienced researchers.3, 4, 5 To circumvent this, several black and whitelists have been created. Beall's list of potential or probable predatory journals remained the go-to list until its sudden closure.6 Later, similar lists such as the Stop Predatory Journals website (https://predatoryjournals.com), and institutional lists such as those published by the University Grants Commission (UGC) India, and several other commercial bodies and associations appeared; however, they have been criticized for several reasons, including their poor methodology and lack of transparency.7, 8, 9 The world of scholarly publishing is not purely black and white, and there are always some grey areas; therefore, we cannot rely on any such listings.