The blog

http://scholarlyoa.com/

deals with this extensively. Here

http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteria-for-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-2nd-edition/

you find the list of criteria, and here

http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/

the publications deemed unethical by them.

The blog

http://scholarlyoa.com/

deals with this extensively. Here

http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteria-for-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-2nd-edition/

you find the list of criteria, and here

http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/

the publications deemed unethical by them.

few parameters to decide whether the journals are reputed or not are:

Impact factor

Review process

Publisher.

there could be other parameters as well.

Key parameters to consider are: reputation of publisher, journal impact factor - the higher the value within a discipline the more reputable is the journal, review process, journal visibility and the ratings by government research agencies - which does not rely only on impact factor, but also on reputation within the discipline. For example, the Australian Research Council has a journal rating system which may rate two journals with same impact factor differently depending on their levels of disciplinary reputation.

firstly it should have a valid firstly it should have a valid international standard serial number(ISSN) and ISBN no.

Secondly it should have impact factor and have its rating in ISI thomson.

Based on Impact factor, ISSN number, and also publisher of the respected journal.

Impact factor is an obvious answer here but also look for the number of citations.

PLoS One charges to publish papers, as do a few others. I have found one case with them, in which they acted in an unethical manner to defend a paper that was seriously flawed.

For me, it's not about the journal, it's about the papers that are in it. If you can't tell whether the science in a paper is valid or not on your own, and have to depend on the so-called "reputation" of the journal for validity, you're too ignorant in that field to be reading it in the first place...

Oh, I forgot to mention the irony of such an article in the New York Times, which has been questioned on its ethicalness and has probably a far sullied reputation than any science journal on Earth of any significant report!

The other answers are technically correct, but impact factors have occasionally been gamed in the past and I think a more accurate answer is that by learning more about your field, joining the professional associations, reading through the classic seminal papers, and meeting other researchers, you will learn a great deal about the reputable publishers and venues for serious papers in your area.

Thanks for the discussion. I think that comments about impact factor reveal that people are interested having some type of metric. That desire also factors into metrics like the H factor for tying to judge the quality of a persons work for promotion and tenure. I think Murray's comment about Impact factors being gamed is also very perceptive. From my own personal experience, when I was first starting out I essentially made a "mistake" (from one type of perspective) by publishing good research in conference proceedings. It would have been better for me professionally to have put some of that work into journals, since it is easier for others to find the work and also I think they are more likely to cite the work if it is in a journal. There is a little bit of an ethic's issue wrapped into that, since I know some people haven't cited work our group has had in conference papers or in Master's thesis's etc. In one case just plagiarizing a M.S. thesis of a student. If the work, had been published in a "good" journal I think the chances of plagiarism are less.

More to the point of this discussion, for some fields like networking or computer architecture, ISI impact factor makes very little sense, and conference papers, or being chair of a conference is much more important. When it comes to promotion and tenure within electrical and computer engineering departments this leads a culture clash sometimes. For example a person can have several hundred or more citations in Google and virtually none by ISI count. So for some fields I would argue that impact factor of the journals between different fields doesn't indicate relative importance.

Also The impact factor I think gets skewed sometimes by the popularity of a "hot" topic. Since the topic is hot, sometimes deservedly so, sometimes not, a topical area will be be more likely to be accepted into a journal with a high impact factor. This can get further skewed by the network of reviewers that are chosen to review topics in that field. It is just a fact of life that slight preferences will be given to people within the network of researchers that know each others work and have met each other or know each other by reputation, or even the organization's reputation.

Without getting into specific preferences, for the mentorship of my students, I often will send a paper to a journal where I think 1) there is a fair review process, 2) where people in the field are likely to see the work and 3)recognize that the journal usually publishes high quality work. Occasionally, when a little Ego jumps in, I'll ask the student if they want to write a paper to a premier journal, but only if I feel that the topic falls into a "hot" area. One thing I do like about those journals is that usually they will make an editorial screening decision very quickly. And you can publish the paper is something more specific with-in a discipline.

I am agree with John. Publishing in a SCI Journal is better than Conference Proceedings considering the better visibility of the research work.

Based on Impact factor and number of citations.

John:

Great comment. I liked it because it was very insightful, regarding the issue in general, and how you address it in your work. I also appreciated your mentioning the problem of plagiarism, something I've been able to avoid being a victim of although I had a close call once...

I believe public education and exposure of academics to predatory and non-predatory journals and publishers will make a difference in the selection of  the right journals and publishers.

I hate the predatory journals

While the original Beall's list web site (scholarly-oa.com) does not host the list anymore anyway, I have recently found a web site

https://predatoryjournals.com/

which seems to build on and expand this list (see https://predatoryjournals.com/about/ ).

See also the related question

https://www.researchgate.net/post/A_new_site_listing_predatory_journals_What_do_you_think_of_it

and the RG project

https://www.researchgate.net/project/ETHICAL-AND-QUESTIONABLE-PRACTICES-IN-RESEARCH-AND-PUBLISHING