{"id":77585,"date":"2025-07-17T00:25:32","date_gmt":"2025-07-17T04:25:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/world.edu\/?p=77585"},"modified":"2025-07-17T00:25:32","modified_gmt":"2025-07-17T04:25:32","slug":"on-predatory-academic-journals-and-conferences","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/world.edu\/on-predatory-academic-journals-and-conferences\/","title":{"rendered":"On predatory academic journals and conferences"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

I\u2019m often asked about predatory journals. So I recently went on a hunt for something other than lists and found a\u00a02022 report on predatory journals and conferences from the InterAcademy Partnership.\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0OK it\u2019s not 2025, but it\u2019s still well worth looking at. The IAP is\u00a0a global network of over 140 science, engineering, and medical academies that work together to address the world\u2019s most challenging problems using the best available scientific evidence. Think of it as an umbrella organisation that brings together prestigious national academies from around the world.\u00a0I read their report so you don\u2019t have to \u2013 although I do suggest you do.<\/p>\n

The IAP report suggests that predatory publishing has evolved from a marginal problem into a global crisis threatening the integrity of academic research. Rather than simple scams targeting naive researchers, researchers face a complex spectrum of behaviours ranging from outright fraud to questionable practices even by established publishers. \u00a0These behaviours include pay-to-publish\/present models without peer review, fake editorial boards listing respected academics, fraudulent impact factors, journal and conference names deceptively similar to those of legitimate ones, and spam invitations to sham conferences with high registration fees.<\/p>\n

The scale of the problem is staggering. The report suggests that over 15,500 predatory journals exist worldwide, with some evidence suggesting that predatory conferences may outnumber legitimate ones. IAP\u2019s global survey of over 1,800 researchers revealed that nearly a quarter had either published in predatory outlets or weren\u2019t sure if they had. If the percentages hold when scaled up, this translates to over 1.2 million researchers worldwide!<\/p>\n

The report offers a \u201cspectrum approach\u201d to replace a simplistic \u201cgood\u201d versus \u201cbad\u201d judgement . At one end are fraudulent journals that steal identities and commit outright deception. The middle ground includes low-quality outlets with inadequate peer review, while the other end encompasses established journals adopting questionable practices like rapid publication promises or pay-to-publish models that prioritise profit over scholarship.<\/p>\n

The IAP survey revealed devastating personal impacts on researchers who discovered they\u2019d been scammed. The report contains stories of careers derailed, reputations damaged, and years of work lost. Some researchers described feeling shame and professional isolation after unknowingly publishing in predatory venues.<\/p>\n

The problem is of course not evenly distributed. The survey found that researchers in South Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan Africa expressed significantly more concern about predatory practices than their counterparts in the EU and North America.<\/p>\n

The report identifies three systemic drivers fuelling the growth of predatory practices:<\/p>\n