Commentaries: Sharks: Predatory journals and conferences in psychiatry,neurology and neuroscience

In the context of the drive for clinicians and academics to publish or present papers, as well as the advent of Open Access, we note the rise of shark-like predatory journals and conferences in psychiatry, neurology and neuroscience (Manca et al., 2017). Such journals and conferences aggressively solicit submissions across excessively broad academic domains (Mercier et al., 2018). Australian authors represented 2.1% of those publishing on Kscien’s list of predatory journals, an updated version of the seminal Beall’s list of predatory journals (Omer et al., 2019). We discuss how predatory journals/conferences seek to exploitatively profit from publishing or hosting research, charging authors excessive fees for substandard products. We describe tips to identify predatory journals/conferences, and how authors/presenters are protected by copyright in Australia.

Predatory journals may involve fake information, fake peer review and unethical practices such as extortionate behaviour and fees (Mercier et al., 2018). Wary experienced academics are often assailed by invitations from predatory journals. However, early career clinicians and researchers are likely less aware of such journals and are often targeted (Mercier et al., 2018).

Predatory conferences also appear to arise from the same motivation as predatory publishing, i.e. they appear to be (Cress, 2017), ‘… conferences that appear to be scholarly but are strictly exploitive money-making schemes that cost authors and funding sources time and money’. Predatory conferences aggressively solicit conference abstract submissions (Cobey et al., 2017) and cover a broad range of disparate topics (Cress, 2017). Predatory conferences may range from substandard to entirely sham events charging excessive fees.

Tips to avoid being devoured by the sharks

When it looks too good to be true, authors/presenters should be wary of possible predatory journals or conferences. We have summarised some characteristics of predatory journals and conferences in Table 1. We recommend Cress (2017), which provides more detailed advice on recognising such predatory journals and conferences. We also recommend asking experienced academic colleagues for advice as to whether a journal or conference is predatory (Mercier et al., 2018).

Table 1.

Examples of predatory journal and conference approaches.

(a) Predatory Journals – Distinguishing Features and Simulated Examples.
Websites to check for predatory journals:
https://thinkchecksubmit.org/
http://kscien.org/predatory.php
Be wary of:
Overly flattering, awkward expression and odd journal titles, e.g. ‘I came across your contribution to the article “Neuropsychiatry of Parkinson’s Disease” and thought it would be an excellent fit for Neuropsychiatry-Clinical-Science’;
Artificial sounding English names for contact persons, e.g. Johnston Stacey;
Odd-looking names and locations for offices and emails, e.g. ‘Neuropsychiatry-Clinical-Science, C/O PO Box 345, Burnside Central, Halifax, Nova Scotia – email: [e-mail]’;
Inducements or promises of publication, e.g. ‘We will provide you waiver of fees if you will suggest 3-4 colleagues/friends to provide [pay to publish] papers’.
(b) Predatory Conference – Distinguishing Features and Simulated Examples.
Be wary of:
Deceptively simulated conference titles, e.g. RANZCP-Congress 2019 (where the real conference has no hyphen);
Excessively broad topics, e.g. Psychiatry, Psychology, Sociology, Nursing, Occupational Therapy;
Unusual venues, e.g. airport or very isolated low amenity hotels for a conference venue;
Marketing the conference as a vacation, e.g. souvenir & conference kit provided;
Unusual/unfamiliar academics for your field in the organising committee and as keynote speakers; using the names of real academics without permission, e.g. https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-m-appalled-academic-ire-as-names-used-to-push-scam-conferences-20180911-p5031y.html;
Odd inducements or promises of publication, e.g. ‘Your Google profiles will grip world attention to your research profile and renders your vision’;
And excessively high fees.

Authors/presenters automatically acquire copyright to their work under Australian law, i.e Commonwealth Copyright Act, 1968, when the material is created, except for instances when they are expressly employed to produce the work, when they are commissioned to do the work or if the work is directed/controlled by state, territory or federal government. Accordingly, authors can explicitly assign or licence their rights to their work to a publisher/conference. The Australian Copyright Council advises it is good business practice to document such assignment in writing. Authors/presenters should ascertain whether a publisher or conference is not predatory before signing any agreements to publish or present, and payment of fees. Genuine journals/conferences will only ask for assignment of copyright after peer review and acceptance, as well as indicating before submission any publication fees for open access.

Conclusion

Early-career clinicians and academics should beware of shark-like predatory journals and publishers. They should carefully evaluate invitations to publish and present and seek advice from experienced academic colleagues before accepting involvement. Failure to avoid predatory journals and conferences may also negatively impact clinicians/academics through association with these disreputable organisations. Early-career clinicians/academics should especially avoid paying extortionate fees for predatory journals or conferences that may lead to a fate similar to Ian Fleming’s shark victim Felix Leiter (Live and Let Die): ‘He disagreed with something that ate him’.