Research Guides: Deceptive Publishers: Resources

Tools for Assessment

Publisher Evaluation Tool
Publisher Evaluation Tool, or PET Project, is a scored checklist that can be used to help scholars make more informed decisions about whether or not to submit their work to an unknown publisher. It is particularly useful in addressing those journals in the gray area: not quite green light, not quite red light
Think, Check, Submit
Think. Check. Submit. is a campaign to help researchers identify trusted journals for their research. It is a simple checklist researchers can use to assess the credentials of a journal or publisher.
Think, Check, Attend
Think. Check. Attend. is a resource to help researchers choose the right conference to present their work.
Journal Evaluation Tool
A scored checklist tool that can be used to evaluate the credibility of publication venues.

Cardinal rule: Do you want your scholarship identified with the journal's content? It doesn't matter if it's Open Access, a traditional business model, a new journal, or an established journal -- ask yourself what is the quality of scholarship. Do you want your work associated with the journal's work?
Consult senior colleagues and/or department head. Do you know anyone who has published there? What was their experience? Don't just look at the journal's list of contributors and assume the best. Talk with colleagues.
Consult your Subject Librarian. Librarians have in-depth knowledge of scholarly publishing, indexing, and abstracting services. Explore the List of Subject Librarians at Purdue.

OSI Brief 3: Deceptive Publishing
From the author: "Deceptive publishing (more commonly known as “predatory publishing”) is an important and troubling issue in scholarly communication. However, its parameters and seriousness are a matter of controversy, and there is not yet any consensus as to how big an issue it is, how fast it is growing, the variety of its manifestations, and what (if anything) can be done to combat it. The broad outlines of deceptive publishing, as described in this brief, are clearer than its exact details."