Dubious journals abound: study
88% of journals in UGC's white list are predatory,
finds study
In list of journals approved by UGC, 88% of 1,009 publications are predatory
A systematic study of the University Grants Commission’s
(UGC) approved list of journals has confirmed what scientists have long
suspected. The white list contains a huge number of dubious or predatory
journals which publish substandard papers for a small fee with very little
peer-reviewing, if at all.
A team led by Professor Bhushan Patwardhan from the
Savitribai Phule Pune University found 88% of 1,009 journals recommended by
universities and included in the white list are dubious journals. Only 112
journals met the criteria set by UGC to be included in the list. The results
were published on Thursday in the journal Current Science.
According to an earlier study published in 2015 in the
journal BMC Medicine, 27% of predatory journal publishers are based in India
and about 35% of authors in such journals are from Indian institutions.
The researchers had randomly selected 1,336 journals from
5,699 university-recommended journals that were included in the UGC list. The
journals included were representative of science, arts and humanities, and
social science. After excluding 327 journals that were indexed in Scopus/Web of
Science, the researchers took up 1,009 journals for critical examination.
For a journal to be included in the list, it should first
meet the basic criterion of providing a verifiable postal address, and email
addresses of the chief editor and editors, on their website. But 349 (34.5%)
journals in the list either did not provide these details or the details
provided were incorrect and therefore rejected. Of the remaining 660 journals,
528 were removed owing to false claims about their impact factor, being indexed
in dubious indexing databases, incorrect ISSN (International Standard Serial
Number) and poor credentials of editors.
“Unfortunately, academic institutions which have
recommended such journals have not really examined them with care. And the UGC
committee appears to have taken the recommendation at face value,” says
Professor Subhash C. Lakhotia from the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, one
of the authors of the paper.
Only 132 journals reached the secondary level of scrutiny
for analysis. The secondary level of scrutiny looked for misleading journal
names such as ‘international’ and ‘global’ in journal titles, editorial
policies, and nature of charges levied on authors. Twenty journals were
rejected at the secondary level and only 112 journals out of 1,009 were found to
be genuine in all.
A scam in itself
“The dubious or predatory journal publishing in India
parallels the Nigerian lottery scam,” says Professor Patwardhan, who is the
corresponding author of the Current Science paper. “It makes a mockery of
scientific publishing and has tarnished the image of India.”
“Honestly, I was not surprised by the huge number of
journals turning out to be dubious. Researchers have been receiving mails from
journal publishers inviting us on editorial boards and to contribute special articles.
It’s a depressing scenario,” says Professor Lakhotia.
“I think the UGC should not maintain the white list. It
is simply not equipped to do it efficiently. It should instead issue advisories
on the quality of research publications,” says Prof. Lakhotia.
Regards
Mr. Pralhad Jadhav
Master of Library & Information Science (NET
Qualified)
Senior Manager @ Knowledge Repository
Khaitan & Co
Mobile @ 9665911593
No comments:
Post a Comment