首页> 外文期刊>Journal of scholarly publishing >Blacklisting or Whitelisting? DETERRING FACULTY IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES FROM PUBLISHING IN SUBSTANDARD JOURNALS
【24h】

Blacklisting or Whitelisting? DETERRING FACULTY IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES FROM PUBLISHING IN SUBSTANDARD JOURNALS

机译:列入黑名单或列入白名单?阻止发展中国家发布标准期刊

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

A thriving black-market economy of scam scholarly publishing, typically referred to as 'predatory publishing,' threatens the quality of scientific literature globally. The scammers publish research with minimal or no peer review and are motivated by article processing charges and not the advancement of scholarship. Authors involved in this scam are either duped or willingly taking advantage of the low rejection rates and quick publication process. Geographic analysis of the origin of predatory journal articles indicates that they predominantly come from developing countries. Consequently, most universities in developing countries operate blacklists of deceptive journals to deter faculty from submitting to predatory publishers. The present article discusses blacklisting and, conversely, whitelisting of legitimate journals as options of deterrence. Specifically, the article provides a critical evaluation of the two approaches by explaining how they work and comparing their pros and cons to inform a decision about which is the better deterrent.
机译:骗局学术出版的蓬勃发展的黑市经济,通常被称为“掠夺性出版”,威胁着全球科学文献的质量。诈骗者发表的研究很少或没有同行评议,并且受到文章处理费用而不是奖学金水平的推动。参与此骗局的作者要么欺骗要么愿意利用低拒绝率和快速发布过程的优势。对掠夺性期刊文章来源的地理分析表明,它们主要来自发展中国家。因此,发展中国家的大多数大学都开设了欺骗性期刊黑名单,以阻止教师提交给掠夺性出版商。本文讨论了将合法期刊列入黑名单,反之,将其列入白名单作为威慑手段。具体地说,本文通过解释这两种方法的工作方式并比较了它们的优缺点,以决定哪种方法更具威慑力,从而对这两种方法进行了批判性评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号