Day- to day, I receive e-mails from journals that almost begging me to submit my research articles to them to assist in issuing their journals for the next issue. Once, I started to look for them and their history, I found a lot of bad reviews.
Interesting discussion. I'm the editor of a journal which is open access, does not charge fees for publication, operates a strict double blind review process and is SCOPUS listed (https://caes.hku.hk/ajal). I hope this shows we are non-predatory even though we are not sponsored by a publisher. We get a good flow of submissions but I would like more good quality submissions. How to achieve that? I have been reluctant to try mass email calls for submissions because, like others in this discussion, I get too many of those and ignore them; also because that seems unlikely to bring good quality submissions; and because I worry that issuing such calls might damage the reputation of the journal.
I did use a targetted mass mailing when the journal was preparing its first issue but that brought very little. I also emailed well-known writers in the field and got a good response for that first issue but can't do that regularly as it will exhaust their good will. Nowadays, I invite colleagues I meet at conferences and other visits to write and to pass on information to their colleagues. I also think knowledge of the journal is passed by word of mouth and, now that it has been established for 6 years, via citations of the published articles.
The flow of submissions is picking up but it is clear from many emails I recieve that less experienced writers have trouble telling the difference between a small journal like ours and the predatory journals. More experienced writers must be able to see we are not predatory and that's why we get some papers from them but they are probably more interested in publishing with bigger name journals, and that is understandable.
So, to me, the soliciting of articles is not the key factor (and maybe I'm just saying that because I have done it but only in a personalised way).The key factor is the speed of review. From personal experience as a reviewer and editor, it seems very unrealistic that a full-on double blind review can be conducted in 2 weeks.
I believe that ranked Journals are the ones which researchers run to it not the opposite
Exactly for this reason, I try to read this kind of emails. May be it is a start of a new great journal.
Most established journals will not call for articles. Even otherwise their kitty is full. Newly formed journals and predatory journals, who are unable to attract enough articles go for these gimmicks. It is better not to respond to such calls.
Mostly, those are predatory journals, as some RG colleagues here have pointed out. However, very occasionally, new journals by reputable publishers might send emails to alert you of their coming into existence. Before deciding to submit it would be wise to check the publisher(s), the editorial team, whether there are publication charges, etc. Also, you might want to avoid journals that state that the review process takes only 2-3 weeks.
The bottom line is: journals that solicit articles from you and promise a very speedy (2-4 weeks) review process are to be avoided.
I'd concur with Larisa. I would add though that journals with a call for a special edition may send out mass messages and even target you using your name.
Interesting discussion. I'm the editor of a journal which is open access, does not charge fees for publication, operates a strict double blind review process and is SCOPUS listed (https://caes.hku.hk/ajal). I hope this shows we are non-predatory even though we are not sponsored by a publisher. We get a good flow of submissions but I would like more good quality submissions. How to achieve that? I have been reluctant to try mass email calls for submissions because, like others in this discussion, I get too many of those and ignore them; also because that seems unlikely to bring good quality submissions; and because I worry that issuing such calls might damage the reputation of the journal.
I did use a targetted mass mailing when the journal was preparing its first issue but that brought very little. I also emailed well-known writers in the field and got a good response for that first issue but can't do that regularly as it will exhaust their good will. Nowadays, I invite colleagues I meet at conferences and other visits to write and to pass on information to their colleagues. I also think knowledge of the journal is passed by word of mouth and, now that it has been established for 6 years, via citations of the published articles.
The flow of submissions is picking up but it is clear from many emails I recieve that less experienced writers have trouble telling the difference between a small journal like ours and the predatory journals. More experienced writers must be able to see we are not predatory and that's why we get some papers from them but they are probably more interested in publishing with bigger name journals, and that is understandable.
So, to me, the soliciting of articles is not the key factor (and maybe I'm just saying that because I have done it but only in a personalised way).The key factor is the speed of review. From personal experience as a reviewer and editor, it seems very unrealistic that a full-on double blind review can be conducted in 2 weeks.
Ramy,
Thanks for asking. I was reluctant to add it to my initial post in case it seemed like a trick to advertise the journal. But now that you have asked....
The scope of The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics is research about the speaking, learning or use of English in Asian contexts. Examples are:
•The teaching and learning of English in Asia
•The use of English in Asia
•The status of English in Asia
•The learning of English by Asians outside Asia
•The use of English by Asians outside Asia
•The impact of Asian cultures or contexts on the learning, use or status of English
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers