The world of scholarly publishing has increasingly become more complicated. Not only do authors need to be vigilant about not submitting their manuscripts to predatory journals, but journals that were once thought to be trustworthy are being delisted from Web of Science for not meeting editorial quality standards. It can be difficult to know which journals are trustworthy and which to be wary of, whether you're looking to publish your own research or are just looking for reliable articles for your own learning and research. This post provides some guidance on navigating the murky scholarly publishing landscape and identifying predatory and grey area journals.
Predatory Journals
Predatory journals are characterized by “false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices” (Grudniewicz et al., 2019). Predatory journals use the open access publishing model to charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) to make profits, without providing the rigorous peer-review, archiving, and editorial services that legitimate scholarly open access journals provide.
Himmelfarb Library has a Predatory Publishing Research Guide that provides:
- A list of red flags and characteristics of predatory journals
- Sample emails from predatory journals that illustrate tactics used by these publishers
- Video tutorials
- Journal evaluation tools to help you determine whether or not a journal is predatory
If you have questions about predatory publishing, contact Ruth Bueter at rbueter@gwu.edu.
Grey Area Journals
Grey area journals, as defined in a 2024 Retraction Watch post, make “use of the APC…operating model and aim to increase the number of publications with the minimum time spend for editorial work and quality assessment” (Kincaid, 2024b). These journals aren’t entirely fraudulent, but they are geared to making maximum profits and don’t always follow scholarly publishing best practices. These journals might be members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), but they also promise unrealistically fast turnaround times for peer review and publication.
Recent Web of Science Delistings
Further muddying the waters, journals from well-known publishers are not exempt from bad behavior. Chemosphere and Science of the Total Environment, both published by Elsevier, were recently delisted from Web of Science. Chemosphere was delisted for “failing to meet editorial quality criteria” (Robinson, 2025). More than 60 papers were also marked with expressions of concern for “potential undisclosed conflicts of interest among editors, authorship irregularities and manipulation of peer reviews and citations” (Joelving, May 13, 2024). Web of Science also recently placed Science of the Total Environment on hold, citing concerns about “the quality of the content published in this journal” (Kincaid, 2024a). To be clear, these journals have been delisted due to the fault of the journal’s practices and not through the fault of individual authors.
Tools to Evaluate Journals
There are plenty of tools available to help you evaluate journals. Here are just a few that can help you determine if a journal is scholarly or not:
- Predatory Publishing Research Guide: This guide has a wealth of information related to predatory publishing, including assessment tools.
- Journal Evaluation Tool: This rubric can help determine if a journal is a good choice for your work.
- Cabells Predatory Reports: Cabells lists violations by predatory journals that don’t follow scholarly publishing best practices. However, since GW does not subscribe to Cabells Medical Predatory Reports, a journal not being listed in Cabells as predatory does not mean that it is scholarly. If you have doubts about a journal that is not listed in Cabells Predatory Reports, please reach out to Ruth Bueter at rbueter@gwu.edu. If the journal is in Cabells Journalytics (their list of scholarly journals), Cabells has deemed the journal scholarly.
References
Grudniewicz, A., Moher, D., Cobey, K. D., Bryson, G. L., Cukier, S., Allen, K., Ardern, C., Balcom, L., Barros, T., Berger, M., Ciro, J. B., Cugusi, L., Donaldson, M. R., Egger, M., Graham, I. D., Hodgkinson, M., Khan, K. M., Mabizela, M., Manca, A., Milzow, K., … Lalu, M. M. (2019). Predatory journals: no definition, no defence. Nature, 576(7786), 210–212. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y
Joelving, F. (May 13, 2024). Publisher slaps 60 papers in chemistry journal with expressions of concern. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2024/05/13/publisher-slaps-60-papers-in-chemistry-journal-with-expressions-of-concern/
Kincaid, E. (October 24, 2024a). eLife latest in string of major journals put on hold from Web of Science. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2024/10/24/elife-latest-in-string-of-major-journals-put-on-hold-from-web-of-science/
Kincaid, E. (December 24, 2024b). Finland Publication Forum will downgrade hundreds of Frontiers and MDPI journals. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12/24/finland-publication-forum-will-downgrade-hundreds-of-frontiers-and-mdpi-journals/
Robinson, J. (January 9, 2025). High profile chemistry journal removed from Web of Science index. Chemistry World. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/high-profile-chemistry-journal-removed-from-web-of-science-index/4020769.article
