In the traditional peer-review publishing model, author-researchers submit their paper draft to a peer-reviewed journal, the journal editor sends the draft to peer-reviewers, the peer reviewers evaluate the draft for quality and scope, the peer reviewers suggest improvements and changes to the author-researchers, the author- researchers revise the draft, the reviewers evaluate the new draft, and so on until the paper is rejected or it is accepted and published within the journal. This model can be time-consuming and costly for the journal. The peer-reviewed journal makes money by charging subscription fees from researchers and libraries who wish to view their articles.
Open access is an alternative publishing model in which the author-researchers pay a fee after the paper draft is accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed journal. The open access journal articles are then free for anyone to read because the costs have already been recouped. New knowledge is now shared more easily with the world because readers need not spend money to get it.
Author-researchers’ priorities are to perform research following good research practice, to present their research effectively to other researchers with its most important findings and most useful information in clear and understandable language, and to grow their reputation as a reputable researcher. Some journals develop a reputation for including high quality research papers and/or accepting only the best research. Various methods are used (and debated) to measure quality research, authors, journals, and publishers.
However, some things can go wrong. Some publishers attempt to exploit the open access publishing model. Sometimes called “predatory publishers,” they engage in fraud and deception to maximize profits while being sloppy or negligent in the execution of peer-review and publication.
Predatory journals have some common characteristics and habits that can help identify them. But even for even an experienced researcher, it can be challenging to determine whether an unfamiliar journal is either legitimate or “predatory.” Even legitimate peer-reviewed journals can go through rough patches in their history where they experience delays in publication or sloppy practice due to changes in editors, management, or technologies that don’t run smoothly. Inexperienced new editors or unfamiliar new submission technologies can derail publication schedules and communications.
The links below describe the common characteristics of predatory journals.
The problem is that predatory publishers don't follow good publishing practice. At its best, peer review provides feedback to help aspiring authors become better researchers, improve their research skills, and produce the best article possible about their research project. Predatory publishers may provide little to no feedback and allow flawed papers to be published. Those flawed papers follow a researcher throughout their career and do not exhibit the researcher's capabilities.
In addition, some conferences use predatory practices. Conferences make money from registration and other fees. The more attendees, the more money. Often, accepted speakers must also pay registration fees. This tempts some groups to promote conferences with the express purpose of maximizing fees and with little effort to maintain quality. Unsuspecting faculty and students may be contacted and invited to attend a conference or be a speaker by a conference that is shoddy and/or nonexistent.
