Scholarly Communication

Predatory publishers typically contact potential authors directly via email to offer their services and encourage publication with many starting to branch out into offering academic conferences. To the researcher eager to make an impact with their work these can seem like very tempting offers but they often come with little academic reward.

The issue of predatory publishing there are a number of factors that can be used to assess an individual publisher. Please note: none of these factors should be taken in isolation but used alongside good judgment.

• Association membership – if a journal claims to be supporting Open Access then check if it is a member of either the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the DHET-accredited journal list 
• Transparency – a good publisher will be open about their practices with contact information and a mission statement easily found on their website. Check the sending address of any emails carefully and look for spelling or grammatical mistakes but be aware of cultural differences that may explain overly formal language. Exercise caution if the publisher appears to focus on a huge range of topics as this may indicate a for-profit rather than for-research approach

• Indexing – appearing in typical indexes and databases for their associated discipline is a good sign for a publisher. However remember that there may be perfectly valid reasons why a particular journal is not indexed such as being very niche or new. Authors could also try searching for other titles from the same publisher to overcome this problem.

• Quality of previous publications – assessing previous output from the publisher in question may give an idea of the academic quality of the publication. Check for basic mistakes in spelling or grammar in the work which may indicate a lack of peer review.
• Fees – any author fees should be clearly explained prior to publication and be easily accessible to potential authors. Be wary of any ‘hidden’ fees which are raised during the publication process.
• Copyright – if the publisher claims to operate under an Open Access model then check whether a Creative Commons or other type of open licence is being applied. The publisher should also be upfront about the rights the author will retain after publication. It is the author’s responsibility to check that these don’t conflict with any funder mandates.
• Peer review - the process of the individual journal should be clearly highlighted and guidelines for both authors and reviewers should be easily accessible. Beware of the promise of fast peer review periods as this may indicate a less than thorough process.
• Editorial board – members should be listed, along with a named Editor in Chief. Authors should consider if the names mentioned are recognized experts in the field the publisher is covering. It may also be worth checking the web presence of some members to see if their membership is mentioned elsewhere.
• Website quality – check if the website looks professional but be aware of cultural differences. What may look sophisticated to someone from a large South African university may be out of reach of a smaller publisher in another country.