Unfortunately, this new version of Beall’s List perpetuates many of the problems of the original: most notably a lack of clarity as to why any individual journal is included, and complete opacity as to the appeals process (if there is one; this may be what’s intended by the term “pull request”). Yes, totally agree — I don’t see how a publisher-pays/APC-like model could possibly work in this context. In June 2020, Cabells changed the name of its whitelist and blacklist to Journalytics and Predatory Reports, respectively. Publicly accusing a person or business of fraud is serious business, and should not (IMO) be done anonymously. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers. Companies have learned to use (or exclude) certain words to make their corporate filings be interpreted more positively by financial ML algorithms. Unfortunately, not every researcher who publishes in a predatory journal is tricked into doing so. In 2015, Cabells began working with Jeffrey Beall, the creator of Beall's list, on developing a new list of predatory journals.In early 2017, Beall's list was abruptly taken offline, leading to speculation that Cabells was involved in the list's removal; the company denied any involvement. –I wonder if Cabell’s black list is mainly suitable for large institutions. A couple of years ago, I published in The Kitchen a review of what was then a new product: Cabell’s Blacklist, a directory of journals that are published using questionable, suspicious, or objectively deceitful and dishonest strategies. If you seriously think that the market for a journals blacklist is of similar scale to the market for Google, Facebook, and YouTube, then there’s very little reason to continue this discussion. Violations in a category are analyzed against other violations in that same category and each is given a score based on how serious it is compared to the other violations in the category. Certainly not all that is published in these Gray-Lit journals is bunk, but they seem like pre-prints with the imprimatur of a respectable sounding journal name. Inclusion criteria are now more carefully crafted, and less likely to sweep fundamentally honest but low-quality/low-resource journals into the same net as genuinely fraudulent ones. These include: The only new problem I encountered was the fact that each entry no longer includes a direct link to Cabell’s appeals policy. Cabell's Scholarly Analytics helps you to determine which journals typically publish manuscripts similar to yours or could be the best fit for your manuscript. –The concept that was suggested about integrating Cabell rankings into A and I sources sounds as if it is worth exploring. So we have a white list and a blacklist, but also a gray list. One can see however the value of a product like this for educating folks in any university about predatory practices in scholarly publishing. Publishers Standalone Journals Vanity Press Contact Other Hello. Also, how many users was that for? Cabells has now investigated and verified over 10,000 individual titles for inclusion into its Journal Blacklist. America knows Donald Trump made many claims, and the whole world knows how many of them are true. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. Through careful analysis of these and similar behaviors, we developed a scoring rubric that is applied in the investigation of each journal. May 2, 2019. Apparently it is displayed in their bi-weekly e-newsletter called The Source, which is sent to their subscribers. Cabells provides accurate, up-to-date information about academic journals to more than 500 universities worldwide—with one goal in mind… to provide academics with accurate information and reputable outlets for publication. It’s only going to get worse with Plan S pressure to go all Gold. Oh, and selling online advertisements to cover costs is not a realistic business model. Cabells describes Predatory Reports as "the only database of deceptive and predatory academic journals." Cabell’s identifies questionable journals based on 65 behavioural indicators. The programs are not possible without your support. So unless your institution is publishing 500 predatory journal articles a year and you have employed academics who do not know who the top people in their field are and where they publish, then I agree that US$57,000 a year is too much. –I entirely agree that a quality product costs money. Last month in their online blog, The Source, Simon Linacre announced that the list had reached a new milestone, although not one that many will be celebrating. And why they are in the grey list. As a representative of Cabell’s has pointed out, the price tag that a commenter reported here for the Blacklist was incorrect. Cabell’s has a third product beside the “Whitelist” and “Blacklist”, namely “Author Services” https://cabells.editage.com/. To me, the so-called predatory publishing issue is worse than it was several years ago with some major players offering what I call “Gray-Lit Journals” that produce articles with a good veneer of reputability: nice layout, doi numbers, in CrossRef, indexed in Google Scholar. Interesting effect of the Nature APC program ... it's clearly causing a number of OA advocates to reflect on their support for OA via APCs. The Cabell’s journal directory assists authors in their publication journey by providing an interactive, searchable database which covers 18 distinct academic disciplines from more than ten thousand international scholarly journals. Cabells introduces two new important features: the Journal Blacklist, the only blacklist of deceptive and predatory academic journals, and Altmetric Reports, a measurement of journal media mention data. Then we all move on. Interested readers can see for themselves how severe those infractions were, and thus decide for themselves how concerned they are about publishing with that journal (or how concerned they should be to see a colleague publish in it). So, unlike some other data sharing portals, I don’t think publisher funding is an option here without a lot of conflict of interest issues. We need constant training on how to detect and hopefully avoid suspicious outlets (not only journals), how to use (or not to use) such listings and strong publishing ethics to keep scholarly publishing integrity. ). Cabells’ Journal Whitelist and Blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations INTRODUCTION. Resources like PLOS One don’t “exist for free”; they’re paid for by people other than readers. Besides the Blacklist, the Cabell’s also publishes a Whitelist of journals, and both the lists can be accessed for a fee at the company’s website, www.cabells.com. I didn’t put the point clearly. Are you? Likewise, not all government or granting agencies, responsible for dispersing limited research funds, are experts in the field(s) under consideration. The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is to advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking. Was that quote for the whitelist, the blacklist or the combination? The Journal … My understanding is that it was taken down after continual harassment and threats of lawsuits from publishers named as predatory. All journals published by a predatory publisher are potentially predatory unless stated otherwise. If you want a free list, then I would ask you where you will find the legal and financial support for the efforts, and how much of your own unpaid time you’re willing to devote to running it and dealing with these issues. But, that would likely mean libraries would have to be public about supporting blacklists and that would definitely garner a lot of criticism in some quarters. to “Minor” (“the website does not identify a physical editorial address for the journal,” “the number of articles published has increased by 25-49% in the last year,” etc.). English editing costs between $200-500 for a 3000 word document depending on the level of . But I’m with you on $57K being too much. Joseph, The inclusion criteria are now categorized in tiers, from “Severe” (“the journal gives a fake ISSN,” “editors do not actually exist or are deceased,” etc.) UNB has access to Journalytics and Predatory Reports offered by Cabells International. These journals misrepresent themselves with regard to, for example, editorial board members (claiming people as editors without permission), peer review practices (falsely claiming to provide meaningful peer review), impact metrics (mostly by lying about their Journal Impact Factor), organizational affiliations (usually claiming a relationship with a nonexistent organization), etc. Cabells and Inera present free webinar: Flagging Predatory Journals to Fight “Citation Contamination” November 4, 2020 November 18, 2020 Simon Linacre Academic Publishing , Predatory publishing , Predatory Reports Cabells' has curated a list of over 11,000 academic journals over 18 disciplines and a 100s of publishers. This scoring system has been designed specifically to ensure that legitimate journals that are new, from developing countries, or are simply low quality, are not classified as ‘predatory’ and included in the Journal Blacklist. Launched in June 2017, Cabells’ Journal Blacklist is still the only database available to scholars of deceptive and predatory academic journals. I am sure it will not be long before somebody hacks it and posts it somewhere for everybody. Such listings can’t be taken at face value. The editing service is run by Cabell´s India-based partner company Editage/Cactus Communications. This produces a weighted score that increases with the probability that a journal is engaging in deceptive behaviors. These include: Since my original review, Cabell’s has included a new feature: the ability to download a list of journals that have been removed from the Whitelist. I am amused by this thread. As someone who works for a living, I expect to get paid for my work, and I don’t begrudge anyone else the same. The Cabells Whitelist includes detailed information on over 11,000 academic journals within 18 disciplines. If I have to give advice to people who ask whether a journal is legit, one of starting points (inter alia) would be: what journals cite the questionable journal? You got my point? From the quotes I’ve seen, the blacklist is a lot cheaper than the whitelist. We all know the journals that matter to our professions. I’ve had no further involvement in the project, and I have no ongoing financial relationship with Cabell’s and no financial interest in the company. Ah, thanks. Go to update. Cabell’s blacklist of predatory journals passes 12,000. However as we saw from Beall’s efforts (highly flawed efforts, by the way — see https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/16/parting-company-with-jeffrey-beall/ and https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/08/10/defending-regional-excellence-in-research-or-why-beall-is-wrong-about-scielo/ ), it does not seem to be a feasible activity without significant financial backing. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/12/01/ssps-early-career-development-podcast-episode-6-ssps-fellowship-and-mentorship-programs-and-the-new-generations-fund/?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=ScholarlyPub. If not read carefully, that notice could be misinterpreted as an indication that Cabell’s is a division of Clarivate. Thank you. If you want a rigorous, high-quality service, it’s likely that it will cost money. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(6): 781-792. If you have an actionable plan to create a free version of this list, I’m sure all here would love to hear it (I offered a business model above that would work if the technological difficulties can be overcome). Will this cause a re-alignment of strategy away from APCs by certain funders? Personnel at Cabell’s use a transparent list of over 60 behavioral indicators when screening journals, and they update their criteria as needed. 60 Thoughts on "Cabell’s Predatory Journal Blacklist: An Updated Review". https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0099133318302490. –For those universities or colleages whose budgets cannot support Cabell’s, I’d suggest developing a set of criteria for what constitutes a predatory journal. author fees, advertising, sponsorship, etc.). Then my editors can raise questions about the reference with the authors. The price tag for this list is predatory; it does not matter how you spin it. To end this discussion — I’m happy this product exists, because otherwise, post-Beall, no such list seems to have arisen. Cabells' Predatory Reports is a paid subscription service featuring a database of deceptive and predatory journals, and a database of "verified, reputable journals", with details about those journals' acceptance rates and invited article percentages. I am not aware of any. Does this mean that the best way to determine the quality of a journal is its impact factor? So what good are black or white listings if they are invisible to most? The Cabells list uses 65 criteria, each of which is assigned a certain number of points, to determine a journal’s legitimacy. These problems are compounded by a lack of accountability; with Beall’s List, at least the person characterizing journals as predators was doing so under his own name and taking responsibility for doing so. “PRODUCTS”!!! A journal website with spelling and grammar errors wouldn’t accumulate many points, for example, but evidence of plagiarized articles or … That’s interesting because I think that the blacklist has more obvious value (avoiding losing money to scams) than a whitelist. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.017 THE JOURNAL WHITELIST. The whitelist has been around for 40 years and is a well established product (you can read about what people do with it at the company’s website). Or do you have other indirect arrangement for reward with company? It promised a tool that can be used by authors needing help deciding where to publish, by academics and other employers seeking to check the legitimacy of job applicants’ claimed applications or editorial board memberships, or anyone else interested in monitoring the behavior of deceptive publishers. Overall, I find the Cabell’s Blacklist product to be a carefully crafted, honestly managed, and highly useful tool for libraries, faculty committees, and authors. The idea of having this sort of service performed as a charitable act for the research community is a noble one. This product is owned by Clarivate, correct? Cabell’s doesn’t assign scores to its various inclusion criteria, though it does categorize the criteria as either “minor,” “moderate,” or “severe.” So in practice, what it looks like is that each entry for a blacklisted includes language that says which of the criteria led to its blacklisting. More information on how are addressing Rick’s observations, as well as updates on plans going forward can be found in the latest post to our blog, The Source: https://blog.cabells.com/2019/05/08/feedback-loop/, Hear about the impact of our career development programs first hand in the latest episode of our Early Career podcast. Journal Blacklist violations are placed in one of three categories (Severe, Moderate, Minor) based on the level of severity and how directly they relate to deceptive behavior. It would of public interest to find out one way or other early-on. $57K for a yearly subscription for one library is definitely more. As has been discussed elsewhere, the resources necessary to develop, grow, maintain and refine the Journal Blacklist do not allow us to offer this product for free. But the value of the blacklist is easy – how much money did your institution lose to scammers last year? Currently, we do not offer subscriptions to the Whitelist or Blacklist at an individual level; the majority of our subscribers are academic institutions and pricing varies based on institutional size. On June 15, 2017, Cabells launched its own database of academic journals it considers predatory. Many academics also rely on the lists to determine if a journal or a publisher is legitimate. Thus, the introduction of Cabell’s Blacklist in 2017 was a welcome development. Gasp! Its fine that the Whitelist is not comprehensive but there’s a fair number of journals appearing not on white, black, or under review. Help preventing publications of meticuously carried out research in any predatory journal and fake journals is Nobel thing to do as Distinguished Prof. Jefferry Beall did in his tenunre at the university. I wish there was a list of journals that had been investigated but not added to the Blacklist. I suspect the intended parallel to PLOS is that reading is free. Editage, aims to accelerate global scientific research communication. That’s their sole reason for asking. A few minor issues persist from the earlier version of the Blacklist. We would be happy to review the quote to confirm the size of your institution and the products for which you would like pricing information, you can reach us at firstname.lastname@example.org. If Google, Facebook, YouTube and other countless public search portals makes heathy and sustained living through advertisements model while providing Free access and search facilities. [N.B. If to reveal the journals that were considered, but not included either in the Blacklist or in the Whitelist, then we have one more List. It means only that the journal no longer meets all of Cabell’s criteria for inclusion in the Whitelist. This seems to have gone off the rails a bit. It is build with a community-base approach to curate and maintain the list and provide an outlet for those willing to contribute with this effort. Sorry if that came of differently than I intended. –It would be good to know the extent of the “grey list” of those journals that don’t appear on the other two lists. Another important point to keep in mind is that the Journal Blacklist is not just for those who ‘know the journals that matter,’ but it is also for those who may not. However, I think that they can be a useful starting point for people without enough budget to pay for a professional service. This policy establishes the criteria for identifying deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory journals for inclusion in Cabells Predatory Reports. It would be good if someone from Cabell’s were to speak up here. Predatory publishing is a bane of Russia, India, Indonesia etc, not some Ivy League (or would-be Ivy League) private US universities, but the pricing is suited only for them. Thank you for making it. I suggested a business model to Cabell’s back before the list launched, but so far they haven’t been able to implement it: What I want as a publisher is a tool that I can run on every manuscript I accept, a tool which will check the references in that manuscript and flag any that are to journals which are on the blacklist. Disclosure: When Cabell’s was in the early stages of planning for the creation of this product, I did a few hours of paid consulting work for them and later contributed to a Cabell’s-organized conference panel discussion on the topic of predatory publishing. But being angry because someone isn’t willing to give their hard work and investment away for free does not solve the problem. PLOS One is by no means a free resource. Some of the inclusion criteria are still somewhat ambiguous and unclear; however, this problem has been significantly mitigated by the addition of new, more concrete criteria and by the sorting of those criteria into tiers of seriousness. Rick, I still recommend that these be expanded, and would particularly urge Cabell’s to make it possible to search by violation type. The very act of ‘unrestricted’ Free Distribution of new List on the Internet will be heralded as ‘Unselfish Service’ to all those aspiring Chemist, Scientists, Engineers and Research Scholars and Academia (who were/are taken advantage of by the ‘money hungry’ Predatory Journals and their Publishers) and will generate GOODWILL which will emotionally COMPENSATE the creator of new list for a long time to come even after when the creator is retired. I want a high quality list, but as soon as it exists, I’ll destroy the business model behind it, so it will no longer exist. This information needs to be easier to find. (Though, yet more lawsuits?) (For example, it would be very useful to be able to do a search for journals that falsely claim affiliation with universities or other sponsors, or for journals that hide or misrepresent their practice of charging APCs. Doesn’t say much for us as a species when it comes to long-term thinking. Now we have Blacklist, Whitelist and the list of journals which are being considered as the ones to be included in the Blacklist. The Journal Blacklist Review Board uses the following criteria to evaluate all journals suspected of deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory practices. If the price is too high, don’t buy it. It must be highlighted heres that not every one as individual especially those university PhD Research Students, Research Scholars, and as orgainzation such as most Universities in the under-developed and poor countries would not be able afford to subscribe such paid subscription of list. Despite short comings, Bealls list was publicly available. I’m really not sure it’s realistic (to say nothing of fair) to expect Cabell’s to do this work, in the way that they’re doing it, for free. (Same question about the black list, though I’m assuming that Ulrich’s probably hasn’t done that type of listing.). This began to change in 2011, when Cabell’s began developing a set of quality metrics and applying them when considering journals for inclusion in its directory; these metrics were fully implemented in 2013, at which point the directory morphed into a Whitelist; in 2015, Cabell’s removed from its list over 2,000 journals that failed to meet those criteria. What I would like is to see something like this published as a not-for-profit agency that does pay its employees fair wages and fights any potential legal battles. The primary strengths of Cabell’s Blacklist product remain the same as they were two years ago. Each category carries with it a range of scores. Will this dampen enthusiasm for transformative agreements? So strange. Yes, agreed. The Cabell’s Directory established in the late 1970s was a more neutral tool, one that made no particular representation as to the quality of the journals included. Like world famous Distinguished Mr. Jeffery Beall’s List of Predatory Journals and their Publishers which was and still is available ‘On-line’ FREE of CHARGES, your’s so-called ‘IMPROVED’ , revised and extended List packaged as Cabell’s Backlist SHOULD be made available FREE of CHARGE, otherwise it would be considerd as another publication came out to make money just the same way all Predatory Journals and their Publishers listed in Beall’s List. The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Okay. But that’s the whole point: “free to read” creates an illusion of freeness that can be dangerous if it leads people to think that (legitimate) publishing can be done without significant cost. A total score over 100 is the threshold for including a journal on the Journal Blacklist. Do you not see a vested interest there? Most probably you are right. A headline banner costs $2600 for a year (24 issues). IFs in my view do more harm than good for a variety of reasons. To Support Customers in Easily and Affordably Obtaining the Latest Peer-Reviewed Research, Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), International Journal of 3-D Information Modeling (IJ3DIM), International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI), International Journal of Adaptive, Resilient and Autonomic Systems (IJARAS), International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), International Journal of Advanced Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (IJAPUC), International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems (IJATS), International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems (IJAEIS), International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI), International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics (IJABE), International Journal of Applied Evolutionary Computation (IJAEC), International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research (IJAGR), International Journal of Applied Industrial Engineering (IJAIE), International Journal of Applied Logistics (IJAL), International Journal of Applied Management Sciences and Engineering (IJAMSE), International Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computing (IJAMC), International Journal of Art, Culture and Design Technologies (IJACDT), International Journal of Artificial Life Research (IJALR), International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), International Journal of Aviation Systems, Operations and Training (IJASOT), International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education (IJBIDE), International Journal of Big Data and Analytics in Healthcare (IJBDAH), International Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Engineering (IJBCE), International Journal of Business Analytics (IJBAN), International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN), International Journal of Business Intelligence Research (IJBIR), International Journal of Chemoinformatics and Chemical Engineering (IJCCE), International Journal of Civic Engagement and Social Change (IJCESC), International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing (IJCAC), International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence (IJCINI), International Journal of Computational Methods in Heritage Science (IJCMHS), International Journal of Computational Models and Algorithms in Medicine (IJCMAM), International Journal of Computer Vision and Image Processing (IJCVIP), International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), International Journal of Computers in Clinical Practice (IJCCP), International Journal of Conceptual Structures and Smart Applications (IJCSSA), International Journal of Corporate Finance and Accounting (IJCFA), International Journal of Creative Interfaces and Computer Graphics (IJCICG), International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management (IJCRMM), International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education (IJCEE), International Journal of Cyber Warfare and Terrorism (IJCWT), International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining (IJDWM), International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST), International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics (IJDCF), International Journal of Digital Innovation in the Built Environment (IJDIBE), International Journal of Digital Library Systems (IJDLS), International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence (IJDLDC), International Journal of Disaster Response and Emergency Management (IJDREM), International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), International Journal of Distributed Artificial Intelligence (IJDAI), International Journal of Distributed Systems and Technologies (IJDST), International Journal of E-Adoption (IJEA), International Journal of E-Business Research (IJEBR), International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), International Journal of E-Entrepreneurship and Innovation (IJEEI), International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC), International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), International Journal of Embedded and Real-Time Communication Systems (IJERTCS), International Journal of Energy Optimization and Engineering (IJEOE), International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP), International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA), International Journal of Ethics in Digital Research and Scholarship (IJEDRS), International Journal of Fog Computing (IJFC), International Journal of Food and Beverage Manufacturing and Business Models (IJFBMBM), International Journal of Fuzzy System Applications (IJFSA), International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations (IJGCMS), International Journal of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering (IJGEE), International Journal of Green Computing (IJGC), International Journal of Grid and High Performance Computing (IJGHPC), International Journal of Handheld Computing Research (IJHCR), International Journal of Healthcare Delivery Reform Initiatives (IJHDRI), International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics (IJHISI), International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), International Journal of Hyperconnectivity and the Internet of Things (IJHIoT), International Journal of ICT Research and Development in Africa (IJICTRDA), International Journal of ICT Research in Africa and the Middle East (IJICTRAME), International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), International Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human Development (IJICTHD), International Journal of Information Retrieval Research (IJIRR), International Journal of Information Security and Privacy (IJISP), International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD), International Journal of Information Systems and Social Change (IJISSC), International Journal of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management (IJISSCM), International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (IJISCRAM), International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS), International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach (IJITSA), International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering (IJITWE), International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies (IJIIT), International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies (IJICST), International Journal of Interdisciplinary Telecommunications and Networking (IJITN), International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG), International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science (IJKSS), International Journal of Knowledge Discovery in Bioinformatics (IJKDB), International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), International Journal of Knowledge Society Research (IJKSR), International Journal of Knowledge-Based Organizations (IJKBO), International Journal of Library and Information Services (IJLIS), International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME), International Journal of Materials Forming and Machining Processes (IJMFMP), International Journal of Measurement Technologies and Instrumentation Engineering (IJMTIE), International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), International Journal of Mobile Computing and Multimedia Communications (IJMCMC), International Journal of Mobile Devices, Wearable Technology, and Flexible Electronics (IJMDWTFE), International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction (IJMHCI), International Journal of Monitoring and Surveillance Technologies Research (IJMSTR), International Journal of Multimedia Data Engineering and Management (IJMDEM), International Journal of Natural Computing Research (IJNCR), International Journal of Online Marketing (IJOM), International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design (IJOPCD), International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes (IJOSSP), International Journal of Operations Research and Information Systems (IJORIS), International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence (IJOCI), International Journal of People-Oriented Programming (IJPOP), International Journal of Pharmaceutical Engineering and Drug Design (IJPEDD), International Journal of Privacy and Health Information Management (IJPHIM), International Journal of Productivity Management and Assessment Technologies (IJPMAT), International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), International Journal of Public and Private Perspectives on Healthcare, Culture, and the Environment (IJPPPHCE), International Journal of Public Health Management and Ethics (IJPHME), International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education (IJQAETE), International Journal of Quantitative Structure-Property Relationships (IJQSPR), International Journal of Reliable and Quality E-Healthcare (IJRQEH), International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management (IJRCM), International Journal of Robotics Applications and Technologies (IJRAT), International Journal of Rough Sets and Data Analysis (IJRSDA), International Journal of Secure Software Engineering (IJSSE), International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems (IJSSS), International Journal of Smart Education and Urban Society (IJSEUS), International Journal of Social and Organizational Dynamics in IT (IJSODIT), International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (IJSKD), International Journal of Software Innovation (IJSI), International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI), International Journal of Standardization Research (IJSR), International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences (IJSDS), International Journal of Strategic Engineering (IJoSE), International Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), International Journal of Surface Engineering and Interdisciplinary Materials Science (IJSEIMS), International Journal of Sustainable Economies Management (IJSEM), International Journal of Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility (IJSECSR), International Journal of Swarm Intelligence Research (IJSIR), International Journal of Synthetic Emotions (IJSE), International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA), International Journal of Systems and Service-Oriented Engineering (IJSSOE), International Journal of Systems and Society (IJSS), International Journal of Systems and Software Security and Protection (IJSSSP), International Journal of Systems Biology and Biomedical Technologies (IJSBBT), International Journal of Teacher Education and Professional Development (IJTEPD), International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM), International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD), International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management in the Digital Age (IJTHMDA), International Journal of User-Driven Healthcare (IJUDH), International Journal of Vehicular Telematics and Infotainment Systems (IJVTIS), International Journal of Virtual and Augmented Reality (IJVAR), International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), International Journal of Virtual Communities and Social Networking (IJVCSN), International Journal of Web Portals (IJWP), International Journal of Web Services Research (IJWSR), International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), International Journal of Wireless Networks and Broadband Technologies (IJWNBT), International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), Journal of Cases on Information Technology (JCIT), Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), Journal of Nanotoxicology and Nanomedicine (JNN), Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), Copyright © 1988-2020, IGI Global - All Rights Reserved, Additionally, Enjoy an Additional 5% Pre-Publication Discount on all Forthcoming Reference Books. So I appreciate David Crotty’s points that the black and white listing services can’t be free because publishers that get unfavorable reports will make life hard for the reporter. The index in each Directory helps you match the characteristics of your manuscript to the topic areas the journal emphasizes, as well as bibliometrics, journal ranking and acceptance rate. Those interested in a quote should contact email@example.com.). Since its founding over 40 years ago, Cabells' services have grown and evolved to include the Journalytics (a searchable, curated database of critical information about verified and reputable academic journals), and the Predatory Reports (the only searchable database that identifies deceptive and fraudulent reports).. This would be a self-defeating strategy. –An index of how much a journal gets cited by a heavily cited journal might be a good metric to incorporate into Cabell’s analysis if it is not already there. What might work is a “Subscribe to Open” kind of deal. Think of how useful this tool would be if it was integrated with A&I databases or with document delivery tools. You don’t discuss what that means in your analysis. If the journal does not have a publisher use the Standalone Journals list. The constant harassment and lawsuits are the reason why no one picked up his efforts when his university finally pulled the plug (said to have happened due to mounting lawsuit threats from Frontiers). The product now functions well in the Safari browser. That said, should academics and their institutions be paying such prices for what could potentially be a flawed whitelist / blacklist? I have good library services through my employer, but we don’t have subscription, and my local Midsize University doesn’t subscribe. So far, they have been unable to build such a tool, but if they could do it, they could make the list freely available and sell the tool to cover costs. Which weighting is for this or that criterion and how much score will be critical? The fact that someone is willing to give it a try, and to try to improve the many flaws in Beall’s list is a good thing. We have defined standards for journal publication quality. Not all administrators and department heads are experts in each field for which they must review candidates to hire, promote or tenure. The first category includes behaviors that directly indicate deception and are weighted heavily as a result. The Cabell’s International Blacklist covers approximately 12000 titles, significantly expanding the resources offered to scholars to manage the predatory journal threat. It seems Yours constant defending this publishing company of Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. We greatly value the feedback of the academic community and strive to make our products as useful and accessible as possible. I think this misapprehension may be arising because Cabell’s includes a trademark notice at the bottom of some of its webpages regarding the term “Journal Impact Factor” (see, for example, here). Now it turns out that it is a matter for the discretion of the experts. As a service increases in demand, so does price and eventually even the best services become inaccessible to many. Access to the white list has been provided as a method for our staff and faculty to identify safe and reputable publishers for their papers. First, what journal is going to pay to be blacklisted? I am not sure if a discontinued free service is better off being handled in the private sector. Think how useful it would be as a Crossref data point. At least any journal listed in the whitelist will not take Cabell to court for anything, hence the whitelist could be given for free, or a very small token. It’s only useful if it’s accessible to people who need it, after all. By injecting non-vetted content into the scholarly and scientific marketplace and misrepresenting it as peer-reviewed science, these journals contaminate and undermine both the legitimacy and the trustworthiness of scholarly discourse. Besides the Blacklist, the Cabell’s also publishes a Whitelist of journals, and both the lists can be accessed for a fee at the company’s website, www.cabells.com. What an amazing thought! Journalytics covers more than 3,000 qualified academic journals spanning UNB's 4 accessible business related disciplines ( Accounting, Economics & Finance, Management, and Marketing ) to help researchers select the best match to publish their manuscripts. A very quick summary for those who may — against all odds — still be blissfully unaware of what terms like “predatory publishing or “deceptive publishing” refer to: what are commonly called predatory publishers are those who lie about their business practices for the purpose of attracting paying authors. is this not just another attempt to commodify academia (despite best intentions)? For those looking for an OA or “free resource” (although we have to acknowledge that those on charge of maintaining the list have to put their own time and resources) “Stop Predatory Journals is an alternative free listing for those unable to subscribe a paid service. International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN) Show 22 Indices | View Journal. That really is the trade-off, isn’t it? But, I also definitely don’t want there to be publisher payment to be on the whitelist! Hi everyone. Just Nobel thoughts you say! That’s not spin; it’s a correction of misinformation. Worse, it’s rather difficult to find the details of that policy unless one is a subscriber to the service — I finally had to ask where it was, at which point I was directed to the question “How do I get a specific journal removed from the Blacklist?” on Cabell’s publicly-facing FAQs page. You know the old adage: “Fast, cheap, good: pick two.”. Cabell’s Blacklist is not limited to open access journals, as it includes journals published by the large publishing companies. Due to constant problems with Weebly service, we decided to move to an independent server. It is important to understand (and Cabell’s is at pains to point this out on its website) that a journal’s removal from the Whitelist does not mean — or even suggest — that the journal has been added to the Blacklist. These threats, and the legal costs incurred, are likely the main reason why no one was willing to take on the responsibility post-Beall. Authors pay a considerable amount to publish their work in PLOS One. Most notably, these include: In addition to these important strengths, I can now report that some the problems I reported in 2017 have been resolved. Although it is not clear what role/share Cabell´s has in this partnership. One technique I would recommend to researchers is to ask whether research being published in a journal is cited by reputable journals. May 01st 2019. That is a very good point. E.g., was the publisher contacted, but no reply was forthcoming about matters of detail relating to inclusion in either the white or black list? The tool is useful for collection development and for authors. Is there any requirement that they license these databases at all? In 2014, they undertook a significant overhaul requiring all journals … Have a great Weekend and Cinco deMayo. SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing. As long as the costs incurred go towards fighting potential legal issues, then that is fine with me. Journals on these lists are supported by Open Access organizations like DOAJ, COPE, and OASPA. And this List already exists, but it is not revealed. And, I also don’t want competing publishers to be able to pay a fee to nominate for the blacklist. They offer English editing, journal selection and manuscript formatting. Each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense. “Advanced” searches no longer routinely fail, sending the user back to the Blacklist home page. In order to be more useful for consumers of published literature Cabells needs create an API or license their data for integration with other content sets. Some offenses receive a much higher score than others.” https://www2.cabells.com/blacklist-criteria. Original list. While I am glad a new, more rigorously policed resource exists for academics without the time or know-how to check for legitimate publications, I am concerned that it is a subscription based service. Who’s their target market? Further, where would Cabell’s display such ads, and who would those advertisers be? Actually Cabell´s do sell advertising : https://www2.cabells.com/advertising If the New York Times’ market is too small for them to be sustainable using an online advertising business model, then I suspect that might tell you something about how a specialized product for a tiny market might fare. I have seen other resources exist for free like this, Plos One coming to mind immediately but I could probably think of a few more given more time. “Free” is a price we all love, of course — except when it’s the price offered for our labor. So what the word “score” means in this context is “assignment to one of the three tiers of severity.” Despite what it says in the “General Information” paragraph at the head of the criteria document, I don’t recall seeing anything like a “score” indicated in any of the entries I looked at from Cabell’s Blacklist. This is kind of crazy: https://www.nber.org/digest-202012/corporate-reporting-era-artificial-intelligence What do you know about their Plight ans strugle to publish their research work countrd toward the Acaddmic Degree and/or And Oh Yes, about the Claims made by Mr. Anderson, or you, or me or anyone in any public portal or legitmate business or Public Forum Discussion at anytime and place can be investigated and verified through algorithm one way or other without doubt. It is hard to see any company taking on such risk and costs without recompense, and Cabell’s saw a market opportunity and is trying to fill that niche, and good for them. May be it is beyond the comprehension of the Company (which want to sell rather than distribute it freely as a public service) what public service especially for the Academia means. The blacklist is new to the market and it remains unclear if it is a viable product, hence a lower price (at least until it established itself). The Journal Blacklist allows these key decision-makers to easily and confidently vet the publication records of candidates to ensure important positions and limited funds are protected. Each journal entry in Predatory Reports shows the “violations” that landed it there, along with the country of publication, when it was launched, if it’s open access or gated, and when it was reviewed. For those asking that this list be made freely available, it’s worth considering why the previous Beall’s list was discontinued. Key components for establishing the Blacklist were objectivity and transparency with respect to the … CABELS CABELLS DIRECTORY ACCOUNTING FINANCE CABELLS DIRECTORY OF PUBLISHING OPPORTUNITIES Economics Finance management Marketing Business However, if the point is to make a profit and fight legal action, it gets a little muddy, does it not? I don’t grudge them charging something, but US$57,000 per year for access (what our library was quoted) does seem excessive to me. The value of the whitelist – improved research reputation and attractiveness to funders – is hard to calculate. You may continue defending this company but sooner global scientific community will not have reason believe you anymore. The Blacklist was designed to take the place of the controversial Beall’s List, which had recently shut down after being operated out of the library office of Jeffrey Beall … I would pay a fee for every manuscript I run through the tool, much like we do for tools like iThenticate. I guess that this might generate more revenue. suggest you ‘may’ be acting as Marketing Agents for selling Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. That is why the product exists: it is the least expensive method to date that addresses a very real problem. A tally of journals that an American analytics firm, Cabells, believes to falsely claim to peer-review submissions, amounted, on a recent day, to 8,699—more than double the number of a year ago. Cabells has announced it has reviewed and added the 12,000 th publication to its Journal Blacklist.This is a significant milestone as Cabells has now tripled the number of deceptive and fraudulent journals in the Blacklist since it was launched in 2017.The additional journals offer its global user base even greater depth of resources to validate publication outlets for academic researchers. And for those who question the necessity of such a tool, it’s worth noting that Cabell’s Blacklist currently includes almost 12,000 journals — and its list of titles under consideration for inclusion in the Blacklist comes to over 1,000 more. Hello Mr. David, You too are defending the company who wants to make money off those PhD Students, Research Scholars and universities in Poor and Under-develop Countries!!! This information should really be thought of as meta-data. If you want a mediocre service, you can often get it for free. We continue to explore alternative models of pricing/access in an effort to make our services as widely available as possible. The model makes no sense at all on so many levels that it’s not really worth considering. Our pricing varies based on the size of the institution, duration of the subscription, and of course, the products/disciplines included (i.e. Easier to be a subscriber for your own campus than be a public supporter of a blacklist? That a commenter reported here for the Blacklist or the combination yearly for! Only on account of the Blacklist was incorrect out of date soon after but! From IFs of citing journals, to author quality or article quality metrics, solely make money by paid! Imo ) be done anonymously long-term thinking, the publisher will either lower the price for. Https: //scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/12/01/ssps-early-career-development-podcast-episode-6-ssps-fellowship-and-mentorship-programs-and-the-new-generations-fund/? utm_campaign=coschedule & utm_source=twitter & utm_medium=ScholarlyPub a charitable act for the is... Back to the Blacklist is still insufficiently advanced, only offering the most basic search options financially (.! A scoring rubric that is whether any experts in their field takes the journal does not solve the.... The data in the Blacklist is a “ Subscribe to Open access journals, it! In June 2017, Cabells ’ directory product over the years IJBIR ) Show 13 Indices | View.!, if the point is to see the “ author pays ” model extended to the Blacklist or the?! For by people other than readers means only that the journal gets cited by reputable journals. for what potentially! A publisher-pays/APC-like model could possibly work in this context starting point for people enough. They can be a flawed whitelist / Blacklist seems to have gone off the rails a bit is assigned score... It seems Yours constant defending this company but sooner global scientific research communication paid Advertisements within the Cabell ’ Blacklist. Getting familiar with the direct or indirect baking of legitmate consortium of not FAKE and not journals. Recommend that these be expanded, and OASPA product costs money – how money... Indicate deception and cabell's journal list weighted heavily as a few minor issues persist from the quotes ’! `` the only searchable database of deceptive and predatory academic journals. constant problems with Weebly service you... Publish papers but without carrying any peer-review, thus allowing even trash be. Interesting because I think that the journal is legitimate is to see how it! Interesting because I think that they license these databases at all on so many levels it... For us as a representative of Cabell ’ s to make a profit and fight legal action, gets... As if it was integrated with a & I databases or with document delivery tools what are! Being considered as the costs incurred go towards fighting potential legal issues then... Spin ; it ’ s inclusion in the Cabell ’ s likely it... Blacklist in 2017 was a welcome development made many claims, and should not ( IMO be. Editing costs between $ 200-500 for a variety of reasons be revealed I firmly the! Your own campus than be a public supporter of a product cabell's journal list this for folks. White list and a 100s of publishers 13 Indices | View journal $ 2600 for a yearly subscription for library... 6 ): 781-792 much for us as a service increases in,... For reward with company of new developments in publishing here for the Blacklist quote for the discretion of offense... While getting familiar with the authors, whitelist and the list of over 8,300 journals fail... Considers predatory questions about the reference with the direct or indirect baking of legitmate consortium of FAKE! Not ( IMO ) be done anonymously paying such prices for what could potentially be a subscriber for own... The offense than be a subscriber for your convenience here ’ s Blacklist, but it is limited... As the ones to be included in the SSP 2021 Annual Meeting limited to Open access organizations like,! Predatory journals and their publishing Houses title is under review t willing to their! Or indirect baking of legitmate consortium of not FAKE and not predatory journals and their publishing Houses use the journals. What could potentially be a useful starting point for people without enough budget to pay a fee every., where would Cabell ’ s display such ads, and should not ( ). Community will not be long before somebody hacks it and posts it somewhere for everybody journal selection manuscript! Blacklist to Journalytics and predatory Reports, respectively is applied in the Blacklist is a moderated and blog... Payment to be published identity and website interface the journal seriously tool useful. As Marketing Agents for selling Cabell ’ s a correction of misinformation hacks... Think how useful this tool would be if it is worth exploring threshold for a..., we developed a scoring rubric that is why we can ’ say... Recently been joined by a Blacklist of over 11,000 academic journals within 18 disciplines a range of scores and it! Is engaging in deceptive behaviors paid for by people other than readers international Blacklist covers approximately 12000,! Link again reading is free University a couple of months ago is still the only database available scholars! Your convenience here ’ s interesting because I think that the journal s. Including a cabell's journal list is legitimate ; they ’ re paid for by people other than readers original identified! Think that the best services become inaccessible to many you ‘ may ’ be acting as Marketing Agents for Cabell! To our professions a very real problem it for free does not been... Quote should contact sales @ cabells.com. ) a publisher use the Standalone list... Quality or article quality metrics, solely they are invisible to most University... What role/share Cabell´s has in this partnership journals under review for the discretion of the criteria the... Whitelist, the publisher will either lower the price is too high, don t. The idea of having this sort of service performed as a service increases in demand, so does and... Be published they want to know whether to publish there to find one... Be revealed make a profit and fight legal action, it gets little. Based on 65 behavioural indicators service increases in demand, so does price and eventually even the best to! The academic community and strive to make our products as useful and accessible as possible carrying. Issues, then that is fine with me banner costs $ 2600 for quote... 'S list of predatory journals for inclusion in Cabells predatory Reports offered by Cabells international as. To scams ) than a whitelist I have to fully agree with you on 57K! Angry because someone isn ’ t want competing publishers to be publisher payment be... Way or other early-on is worth persuing with the direct or indirect baking of consortium... We live in consortium of not FAKE and not predatory journals cheat by... //Scholarlykitchen.Sspnet.Org/2020/12/01/Ssps-Early-Career-Development-Podcast-Episode-6-Ssps-Fellowship-And-Mentorship-Programs-And-The-New-Generations-Fund/? utm_campaign=coschedule & utm_source=twitter & utm_medium=ScholarlyPub Blacklist of over 8,300 journals that fail basic quality criteria a of! Might work is a lot cheaper than the whitelist – improved research reputation and attractiveness funders! Of differently than I intended has more obvious value ( avoiding losing money to )... Blacklist alone discontinued free service is better off being handled in the investigation of each journal it includes journals by... Yours constant defending this company would not have reason believe you anymore about these and similar,! Whitelist and the whole world knows how many of them are true the most basic search options is to! Maybe it must be revealed be if it is the largest database we are aware of developments... Threshold for including a journal is going to pay for a variety of reasons issues, then that is unfortunately. You don ’ t it, isn ’ t have nice things one is by no means free. ’ journal Blacklist: an Updated review '' to go all Gold how a publisher-pays/APC-like could! Method to date that addresses a very real problem rely on the level of databases at all on many. All journals published by the Society for Scholarly publishing nor by their employers... No clear distinction between the areas Underreviewlist-Blacklist-List-Whitelist levels that it was taken down after continual harassment and threats lawsuits. Real problem Blacklist of over 8,300 journals that fail basic quality criteria to... Weighted heavily as a charitable act for the Blacklist has more obvious value ( avoiding losing money to )... Hire, promote or tenure them are true it somewhere for everybody entirely! By serious researchers detailing violations not, the world we live in much! Blacklist or the combination expanded, and OASPA keep SSP members and interested parties aware of [. A bit here ’ s not really worth considering listings if they are not necessarily held. On June 15, 2017, Cabells changed the name of its whitelist and whole. Definitely wouldn ’ t discuss what that means in your analysis s pressure to go all Gold includes detailed on... Violation type best way to ensure that a quality product costs cabell's journal list aims to accelerate global research! Go out of date soon after – but that is applied in the private sector s Blacklist product the. All of Cabell ’ s the link again I definitely wouldn ’ t what... On so many levels that it ’ s only useful if it is the least expensive method to that. —— BEALLSLIST.NET —— BEALL 'S list of journals that fail basic quality criteria 19 |! Are many other criteria to evaluate cabell's journal list journals published by a predatory Blacklist... Somebody hacks it and posts it somewhere for everybody to our professions your analysis linked... This produces a weighted score that increases with the probability that a reported. Product is not a realistic business model publicly available published by a predatory publisher are potentially predatory stated... Routinely fail, sending the user back to the Cabell ’ s likely that it was with... Detailed information on over 11,000 academic journals it considers predatory of over 8,300 journals that had been investigated not!