Daniel Lemire's blog

, 4 min read

Spam journals or open journals?

5 thoughts on “Spam journals or open journals?”

  1. innar says:

    this part is my favourite:
    “Indexed in
    Google, Google Scholar”

  2. yuhong yan says:

    If it is started from a commercial company, and the objective is to make money, I did not see the necessary causal link between a commercial model to a high quality journal, open or non-open. I think the open journal has to learn the model of open sources to build up the quality.

  3. Cyril says:

    We recently got a warning about another bunch of new on-line journals who are apparently recruiting for their editorial board: Scientific Journals International.

    Don’t know if they are related, or more sign of a budding trend of open access journals with sometimes questionable standards.

  4. See my blog entry (http://gunther-eysenbach.blogspot.com/2008/03/black-sheep-among-open-access-journals.html) on the illegal practices of Bentham – I’ve now received over a dozen bulk emails from them “asking” me to submit my work to them. They need to be taught a lesson in ethical behavior…

  5. To me, the number of OA journals launched by Bentham and their spam advertisement do no leave a good impression. Listing in Google and Google scholar is not of much relevance, one would need to check ISI (needed to get an impact factor) and Pubmed (MEDLINE). I have not bothered to check their 200+ journals but the few I checked are not listed anywhere. OA publishing is a way of earning money, too.
    My favorite OA publisher is BMC with reputable journals, impact factor of several over 4 and quite some over 3.
    Journals published by scientific societies are another excellent option (usually OA after 6 or 12 months).
    Petr Karlovsky