What you just highlighted, a very important point dear Prof Dr. Michael John McAleer. Recently, there has been an increasing number of journals that do not publish academic articles, unless the author of the article pays money for it. They claim that these amounts for reading and reviewing the articles which are a false claim on all levels.

I have no idea about this particular journal. What I do know is that no self-respecting academic should be paying to be published. It smacks of desperation.

Christopher NOCK

What you just highlighted, a very important point dear Prof Dr. Michael John McAleer. Recently, there has been an increasing number of journals that do not publish academic articles, unless the author of the article pays money for it. They claim that these amounts for reading and reviewing the articles which are a false claim on all levels.

In Economics and Finance, there are non-negotiable submission fees, including leading journals.

Well, i see from your file that you are a well established high flyer who wouldn't bother with such nonsense. Why are you asking the fest of us to bother?

NOCK

Dear Christopher Nock,

Like many others in my profession, I also publish in Open Access journals.

I want to know what my colleagues in other disciplines think as I value wide-ranging perspectives.

Thank you.

We have to evaluate the journal in different perspective. Payment is one thing

Many leading journals require payment of various fees, including Nature and Science.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were still in Kingston, Ontario. I know just how piss boring that can be on a Sunday evening. Thanks for your explanation. You must have a motto, and that motto should be: "don't pay, won't pay."

NOCK

I finished my PhD in Kingston, Ontario many years ago.

National and international research funds enable payment of journal submission, publishing and APC fees, and do not seem to distinguish between Open Access and not Open Access.

The European convention seems to be moving against payment of fees for downloading papers from large and powerful international publishers, such as those starting with E.

Most of publishers have proposed their own offers of open acces. Elsevier, Springer and IEEE already have this option,. Scientific Reports are form Springer.

To Erik:

You are correct that Scientific Reports is published by Springer.

However, the fast track option is, in my view unethical, as every submission should be reviewed as quickly as possible, and without additional payment.

In any event, a report in 3 weeks is not, in my view, fast tracking as many Open Access journals can provide anything up to 5 reports in 3 weeks, with payment only upon acceptance, not submission.

To Michael:

I was asking a question, not making an accusation.

To be accused of predatory behaviour, a publisher would probably need to meet most if not all of your suggested criteria.

In your response to a related Question:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_dangerous_are_the_predatory_journals stated the following:

you stated the following:

"Incidentally, not everyone takes seriously Beall's list of "Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers."

Potential, possible, or probable?

Really?"

I agree with your critical assessment of the (now discontinued) Beall's list of predatory journals.

There are clearly many predatory journals that are included in the list, but many journals that are NOT "potential, possible or probable) predatory journals are also included in the list.

Please check both the journals and publisher before you submit. The list can be obtained at https://predatoryjournals.com. There are thousands of them. Check and be alert. Published Predatory Journals are not recognised for graduation nor promotion.

Any journals that needs payment and promises a super turnaround time. Check!

To Chia-Lin Chang:

Thank you for your detailed and supportive Answer regarding Beall's list of "Potential, possible, or probable" predatory journals.

To Fouz Baroudi :

Thank you for the website that discusses predatory journals, which you have distributed widely on RG.

Checking the purported quality and legitimacy of journals before submitting a paper for possible publication is sensible practice.

It is worth bearing in mind that any list of "Potential, possible, or probable" predatory journals will contain inaccuracies, in which case non-predatory journals can be designated incorrectly and unfairly.

Dear Michael John McAleer ,

I understand your point on whether it is ethical and desirable to give a fast track option. Nevertheless predatory or not is a way different matter.

Whether a journal (or publisher) is predatory is a vivid and relevant discussion initiated by the initiatives of Jeffrey Beal see for a good overview:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beall%27s_List

Your question regarding Scientific Reports touches I feel another matter.

PLOS ONE founded in 2006 by Public Library of Science, which is a non-profit open-access science, technology and medicine publisher, innovator and advocacy organization. This journal use other conceptual ideas compared to traditional peer-reviewed scientific publishing. It does and I quote “not use the perceived importance of a paper as a criterion for acceptance or rejection. The idea is that, instead, PLOS One only verifies whether experiments and data analysis were conducted rigorously, and leaves it to the scientific community to ascertain importance, post publication, through debate and comment” (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1637059/).

Because of the overwhelming success of PLOS ONE (and their concept) other publishers followed:

Scientific Report (Nature Research part of Springer Nature), conceptually similar as PLOS ONE and in terms of outcomes nowadays even bigger than PLOS ONE.

PeerJ (publisher holds the same name), use to be rather cheap but they have increased their charges.

Heliyon (Elsevier), is Elsevier’s attempt to get a bit of the market share in this successful part of scientific publishing.

Back to your point regarding the fast track option, presumably Scientific Reports estimated that this option is one way to keep ahead of the ‘competition’. One aspect of (scientific) publishing is and remains the ‘business’ or economic side.

Unfortunately scientific publishing is not only about dissemination of scientific information, new innovations and accessibility for everyone.

To Rob:

Many thanks for your detailed, informative and helpful Answer.

My Question was not an accusation, but an open invitation to academics on RG to communicate, as are many threads in Q&A.

For what it is worth, I have never taken Beall's List of "potential, possible, or probable" predatory journals seriously as it has tarred journals that are none of the above with a very wide brush.

It is related, at least tangentially, to the following thread:

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

Many thanks again.

Dear Rob Keller and Michael John McAleer:

I have enjoyed reading the informative exchange regarding predatory journals and commercial aspects of publishing, for which there may be some overlap.

I would like to thank all the academics who have provided interesting and stimulating Answers to the Question.

I would like to thank all the academics who have provided interesting and stimulating Answers to the Question.