International Journal of Science and Research Archive (https://ijsra.net/) is it a predatory journal?
The International Journal of Science and Research Archive (IJSRA) presents itself as a peer-reviewed, open-access journal that follows a double-blind review process. According to its website (ijsra.net), it claims to provide rapid publication within 48 hours, offers CrossRef DOIs, and mentions indexing in platforms like Google Scholar. It also advertises a high “impact factor” and frequent publication cycles (monthly or bi-monthly). However, despite these claims, there are several red flags that suggest the journal may be predatory in nature.
First, although IJSRA is not listed on Beall’s List of predatory journals, this does not confirm its legitimacy. Beall’s List has not been updated since 2017 and is widely considered incomplete. Importantly, the absence of a journal or publisher from blacklists like Beall’s or Cabell’s does not mean it is reputable. In the case of IJSRA, several characteristics raise concerns. For instance, the claimed impact factor is not provided by recognized indexing services such as Clarivate Analytics (Journal Citation Reports), and the journal is not indexed in major scholarly databases like Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, or the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
Another major concern is the journal's claim of publishing articles within 48 hours. Such rapid turnaround times are typically incompatible with rigorous peer review and are widely considered a hallmark of predatory publishing. Additionally, there is a lack of transparency regarding its editorial board and peer review procedures. These opaque practices further align it with journals known to exploit authors for publication fees without offering legitimate editorial services. The journal’s aggressive self-promotion, vague descriptions of its metrics, and absence of any independent academic endorsements strengthen this assessment.
In summary, while IJSRA is not formally listed on any current blacklist, it displays several hallmarks of a predatory journal. These include misleading impact metrics, unrealistic publication timelines, lack of indexing in reputable databases, and questionable peer review practices. As such, it is strongly advised that researchers avoid submitting their work to IJSRA to protect the integrity and visibility of their academic output. Researchers should instead consider publishing in journals listed in reputable databases.
This really depends on your definition of "predatory". While it is clearly a journal that sells publication opportunities withut quality controll to authors, this is very common by now and includes Frontiers, MDPI journals and even journals recently set up by traditional publishers, which are not predatory but make a profit from undermining the quality control of scientific communities.
For a journal to be "predatory" in the original sense it would need to hide publication costs until authors are committed. And indeed, this one does: Below the list of absurdly low publication fees there is the sentence
"Kindly note that any Transaction fees will be borne by authors only."
The amount of transaction fees is not specified. There you have it.
The Scopus Index does not tell you a thing because Scopus does not want to (or does not have the resources to) thoroughly check all the journals they index. This is why quite a number of questionable journals are indexed (the same with Web of Science). I think some of them were removed a while ago, but the problem remains.
Dear M. Raihan
The journal “International Journal of Science and Research Archive” is, despite the fact that the definition is a matter of debate, unquestionably a predatory one. On their behalf one has to say:
-The DOI seems real
-It is unclear what they mean with the ‘promise’ that they publish within 48 hours since none of the papers have been published within that time frame (everything took at least 3-4 weeks between received and acceptance date)
-The mentioning of possible additional transactions costs are (for open access) pretty standard. This means that there might be fees from services like PayPal, credit card or bank transfers or VAT tax, see for example https://www.pagepressjournals.org/jbr/fee In this case it will be a few USD or Euro’s
Why definitely predatory? The list of red flags is long:
-As you said yourself their prominently mentioned impact factor is at best misleading since they are not indexed in Clarivate’s indices and therefor by definition they have no impact factor
-Furthermore, as you said as well, no serious indexing Scopus, WoS, DOAJ membership etc.
-Contact address (physical address) is at best a virtual office
-The indexing info https://ijsra.net/content/indexing mentions so-called misleading metrics (https://beallslist.net/misleading-metrics/ ) like CiteFactor and DRJI often used by predatory journals/publishers
-The fact that they are not mentioned in the Beall’s list (which IS by the way updated, thanks to an initiative of someone else than Jeffrey Beall, see https://beallslist.net/#update and for example https://beallslist.net/changelog/ for the latest changes) is because they are relatively new and because they change the names of the publisher behind all this. Here for example https://ijsra.net/content/contact-us they mention Magna Scientia https://www.magnascientiapub.com/content/magna-scientia-journals and here https://www.scilit.com/sources/58175 they mention GSC Online Press https://gsconlinepress.com
-I think that looking at the same contact info and/or lay-out the following ‘publishers’ https://worldjournalseries.com/journals/wjcrst/content/contact-us and Global Scholar Publications (see for example this paper with exactly the same lay-out https://gsjournals.com/gjrst/ArchiveIssue-2023-Vol1-Issue2 ) are all one and the same. Indeed, they disclose some of the connections here https://magnascientiapub.com/content/our-associated-journals
-It took me literally 10 minutes to spot an imposter that published in numerous journals of this/these publisher(s). One example how fraudulent, he ‘simply’ changed the author info/title and pretend to be one of the authors of this 'paper' (see for the full story https://rcakeller.blogspot.com/2025/07/why-plagiarize-if-you-can-simply-make.html )
Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted
while the real and original paper isArticle Do Green Parties Affect Local Waste Management Policies?
Personally, I know enough, this is a journal I would avoid.Best regards.
Dear M. Raihan
When it comes to your remark that journals from for example MDPI are Scopus indexed, I would say you are absolutely right. Journals like that are in no way comparable to this IJSRA journal. Take for example the journal you mentioned, Sensors (https://www.mdpi.com/journasensors) it is:
-Indexed in Scopus
-Indexed in Clarivate’s SCIE
-Indexed in PubMed
-Indexed in MEDLINE
-Member of DOAJ https://doaj.org/toc/1424-8220
-Transparency when it comes to contact info, peer review, editorial board etc.
Yes, it is true that publishers like MDPI are subjected to controversy (with numerous questions/discussions here on RG) and though they are not flawless I think that it cannot be true that Scopus, DOAJ, Clarivate are all wrong when they consider MDPI and this journal Sensors as genuine and legit.
When it comes to delisting it is clear that besides one or two journals from MDPI numerous journals (not necessarily open access) from Elsevier, Springer, Wiley etc. are delisted in WoS, see for example
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/06/18/clarivate-impact-factor-suppression-list-2025-self-citation-stacking/#more-132145
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/06/27/seventeen-journals-lose-impact-factors-for-suspected-citation-manipulation/
https://retractionwatch.com/2023/03/21/nearly-20-hindawi-journals-delisted-from-leading-index-amid-concerns-of-papermill-activity/
In general, I would say that for example looking at your list of publication you have a ‘healthy’ spread of publishers you published in.
So back to your question, be clear this IJSRA is definitely another league: a questionable pool of predatory/low quality journals.
Best regards.
Dear M. Raihan
An example of the poor quality of this journal can be found in the following ‘paper’ Article Progress and obstacles in the use of artificial intelligence...
is a plagiarized version ofHarle, S.M. Advancements and challenges in the application of artificial intelligence in civil engineering: a comprehensive review. Asian J Civ Eng 25, 1061–1078 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-023-00760-9
The reference list is identical and the first part I can check (see enclosed files) is simply paraphrased but is exactly lifted from the original text.
The 'author' https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ruchit-Parekh-4 of this paper is fond of this 'journal' with countless papers in this journal. I 'dedicated' a discussion about the imposter behind this 'paper' here on RG https://www.researchgate.net/post/ResearchGate_fails_to_act_on_a_serious_and_obvious_example_of_scientific_misconduct_fraud_scam_case_report_1 a profile that the RG team refuse/is unwilling/is unable to remove here on RG.
Best regards.
Dear M. Raihan
Just another example of the questionable quality of this journal. This ‘paper’Article Applications of artificial intelligence in enhancing buildin...
is a blunt example of plagiarism. The original isHuang, X., Wu, X., Usmani, A. (2022). Perspectives of Using Artificial Intelligence in Building Fire Safety. In: Naser, M., Corbett, G. (eds) Handbook of Cognitive and Autonomous Systems for Fire Resilient Infrastructures. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98685-8_6
The text is slightly altered (see enclosed file) but the whole set-up (including all figures) are stolen from the original. The reference list is almost identical, beside the changed inclusion of three ‘papers’ of this imposter (reference number 12, 18 and 22).
This not only shows the fraud performed by this imposter, but also the poor (if any) peer review and plagiarism check of this ‘journal’.
As said before see for more issues about the 'author' behind all these plagiarised papers and more, see my discussion about this person https://www.researchgate.net/post/ResearchGate_fails_to_act_on_a_serious_and_obvious_example_of_scientific_misconduct_fraud_scam_case_report_1
Best regards.
Dear M. Raihan
The list goes on. The following ‘paper’ Article Sustainable knowledge management: Driving green technology i...
is a plagiarised version of the originalAli Nawaz Khan, Khalid Mehmood, Ho Kwong Kwan, Green knowledge management: A key driver of green technology innovation and sustainable performance in the construction organizations, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, Volume 9, Issue 1,
2024,100455,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100455
See for example (see enclosed files):
-the introduction
-the Research Question (RQ) section
-the Fig. 1 part, where by the way the fake version does not even has a Figure enclosed. Especially that this obvious mistake is not spotted is a strong indication that the peer review (if even happened) is extremely weak
-the same is true for the references which are unrelated to the content of the 'paper'
And this little rephrasing is, keeping the whole set-up of the original paper intact, going on throughout the whole ‘paper’.
Best regards.
PS. Cannot stress enough that his is only a small part of the whole fraud/scam story when it comes to this imposter, see https://www.researchgate.net/post/ResearchGate_fails_to_act_on_a_serious_and_obvious_example_of_scientific_misconduct_fraud_scam_case_report_1
Dear M. Raihan Yet another example of what this journal allows. The following paperArticle Enhancing construction site efficiency through artificial in...
is a plagiarised version ofRoslan, Nurul Azreen Izzatie, et al. "Artificial Intelligence (AI) Implementation in Improving Construction Site Workflow Performance." Research in Management of Technology and Business 5.1 (2024): 1275-1301.
See for example (see enclosed files):
-Abstract
-Research question section
-Tables are identical (although the fake version contains a typo error with the races involved…)
The fraud is over and over following the same scheme. Just rephase/paraphrase improperly throughout the whole paper (but essentially it is just lifting the original text and in this case Tables).
Again the message is two-fold. First this indicates the poor quality of this journal or better the predatory behaviour (by publishing basically everything). Second it demonstrate the horrible dishonest behaviour of the imposter and the dubious if not criminal content of the profile https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ruchit-Parekh-4 as discussed here https://www.researchgate.net/post/ResearchGate_fails_to_act_on_a_serious_and_obvious_example_of_scientific_misconduct_fraud_scam_case_report_1
Best regards.
The Journal is considered predatory due to a lack of clarity regarding its editorial board members and peer review process. Journal charges are unclear and also has some misleading metrics. Although journal is not officially blacklisted but there are several concerns regarding its legitimacy.
My research question might be interesting one, about predatory Journals and given examples, case studies and resources. Discussion started in 2013!
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_possible_to_publish_a_noteworthy_paper_in_a_Predatory_Journal_Why_should_one_do_it
I have read some published articles, and I can clearly say that they could not pass the review process because they do not meet even the minimum standards of scientific work. As an example, I will give the article https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2025.14.1.0227
When you look at it, you can immediately criticise the article:
- the unclear methodology
- the data used are not specified and therefore traceable
- the results are completely unfounded
Even artificial intelligence could write a better scientific article, so the review process for this article either did not take place at all, or its quality was zero.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science
- Research Topics