Question for journal editors and editorial committee members

[permanent imposter]

(I'm not sure if this belongs in a new thread -- I wanted to add it to the open-access journals thread but I got a warning about the thread being old.)

Occasionally I see CFPs from newer open-access journals that I'd never heard of. These journals usually have a really broad scope and cover several disciplines. However, when I click through the websites are usually not very well put-together, or are even hosted by blog services. If I click through to the editorial board, I do see a list of names from legitimate institutions (though many are from outside of the US).

If you are on the editorial board of such a journal, how would you feel about receiving an email asking about the legitimacy of the journal? Have you received such emails before? (I understand that some shadier outfits appropriate scholars' names without their knowledge, but I'm not sure if this is the case here.)

[Ruralguy]

I think rather than directly asking about legitimacy, ask these people about properties of the journal that *to you* would indicate legitimacy. I.e., how do you define legitimacy?
The people who get bothered by this should not be on the board of such a journal. Those who feel everything is on the up and up should be more than willing to answer such questions since it will lead to more customers.

[Parasaurolophus]

If I was on a journal board--and I'm not--I wouldn't mind at all.

But another way to get a sense of how legitimate the journal is, is to check out its existing content. Who's being published there? Do you know and respect their work? Is the work in there actually any good?

[mamselle]

Who's the fellow who was running a list of legit and suspect journals?

I know he stopped adding to it, but I believe the <<on dit>> was that someone had copied it before he took it down, and re-posted it somewhere.

If that could be found, and if the journal in question began before he stopped adding to his list, you might be able to get something from that.

M. 

[artalot]

When you're emailing editors, you might ask about page fees or other per publication fees. This is a red flag in the humanities - if you're paying them to publish, then it's probably not a legitimate outfit.
Also, whether they're legitimate or not, these kinds of journals seem aimed at scholars who just need publications. Who is the audience for something so broad? What field are they hoping to contribute to? And how are they intervening in or starting a conversation in that field?

[Parasaurolophus]

Who's the fellow who was running a list of legit and suspect journals?

I know he stopped adding to it, but I believe the <<on dit>> was that someone had copied it before he took it down, and re-posted it somewhere.

If that could be found, and if the journal in question began before he stopped adding to his list, you might be able to get something from that.

M.

Jeffrey Beall? Beall's List.

[Hegemony]

Sometimes these scam journals do have a list of names of legitimate scholars, but those scholars have never actually heard of the journal. Assuming that they are genuinely on the board, they're probably going to defend the legitimacy of the journal. Whether they're right or being fooled themselves, who knows.

What I would do is look at back issues of the journal. Are the people being published scholars who are also being published in legitimate journals? Are the articles in the journal in question being cited in the field? Are the authors of the articles established scholars, or grad students or younger scholars in out-of-the-way places who might not have the guidance to reject a scam journal?

[mamselle]

Who's the fellow who was running a list of legit and suspect journals?

I know he stopped adding to it, but I believe the <<on dit>> was that someone had copied it before he took it down, and re-posted it somewhere.

If that could be found, and if the journal in question began before he stopped adding to his list, you might be able to get something from that.

M.

Jeffrey Beall? Beall's List.

That's it.

M.

[darkstarrynight]

Check Ulrich's database also for information about the journal, what country houses it, and if it is peer reviewed. That is a really helpful database many libraries subscribe to for this very reason.

I suppose I am fortunate that the open access journal I edit has a "real" web site so I do not anticipate receiving such questions. We do not charge fees for submission either. A professional organization houses the publication.

[permanent imposter]

Thank you for the great advice, everyone! Obviously publishing at these places wouldn't be my first choice, but I am genuinely curious because they seem to post their CFP's a lot.

I tried to look up Ulrich's database (I saw it mentioned in another thread) but my institution actually doesn't have access :/

[Hegemony]

Predatory journals post their CFPs a lot because that's how they make their profits. They can't rely on reputation to get them submissions; they have to be out and drumming up new vulnerable victims all the time.

[Sun_Worshiper]

I'd just avoid journals that aren't with a major publisher (e.g. Elsevier, Sage, T&F, Wiley, or a UP)

[Wahoo Redux]

It helps to know what discipline, but most associations have lists of legitimate journals.  I don't know how comprehensive these are, particularly with all the newer online publications, but it might be a place to start.

For instance:

MLA Directory of Periodicals

[url=https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.phpScientific Journal Rankings

You might also just go to your library's EBSCOHost databases and do a journal search.  This is not perfect because a lot of these databases host predatory journals, but it would be a good indicator if you do not see any articles from your journal.

When in doubt, find another outlet.

[Hibush]

Predatory journals post their CFPs a lot because that's how they make their profits. They can't rely on reputation to get them submissions; they have to be out and drumming up new vulnerable victims all the time.

Exactly, frequent CFPs are like frequent offers of helping a Nigerian prince as an indicator of bad "opportunities."

[mleok]

Well, one good way to see how highly the members of the editorial board view the journal is seeing if they advertise their board membership on their CVs and whether they publish in that journal.