Dear Muhammad Wajid Javed ,

Why predatory? Well that’s an interesting question. If you search for the Beall’s list here on RG or for example:

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

You find that there is quite a vivid debate around exactly this point. If you search here on RG on predatory you find excellent advices on how to recognize whether a journal (or its publisher) is potentially predatory or not and to what extent the so-called Beall’s list can help answering this question.

In this particular case it is basically unknown why the publisher is included in the list (this is also one of the things why some criticize this list). The ‘logic’ behind the inclusion is that once the publisher is labelled potentially predatory then automatically all journals by that publisher are labelled as such as well.

If you ask me then this journal might be one of the examples where the Beall’s list is wrong. I estimate that a journal with:

-a Scopus indexing (for already quite some years) and a CiteScore 1.2

-a Clarivate (Web of Science) impact factor 0.822

-all papers have decent submission and acceptance date info suggesting proper peer review

-contact info and fee info seems ok and is transparent

-no list with meaningless indexing info

is not predatory. It seems to lack the ‘typical’ characteristics of a predatory journal. Unfortunately (in the past) inclusion in this notorious list is easier than getting delisted. Rightfully so or not but quite some organizations including universities take this list quite serious and I can only presume that this might be the reason why this journal is not included in the database you talked about.

Hope this clarifies the matter a bit.

Best regards.

Dear Muhammad Wajid Javed ,

The journal "International Journal of Agriculture and Biology" http://www.fspublishers.org/index.php is indeed having an impact factor (0.822) and is Scopus indexed, so one could argue that this is a legit journal.

However, this journal is published by “Friends Science Publishers (FSP)” and this publisher is listed in the Beall’s list of potential predatory publishers:

https://beallslist.net/

Perhaps this is the reason?

Best regards.

Thank you Dr. Rob Keller . On what criteria, the predatory nature of journal is decided?

Dear Muhammad Wajid Javed ,

Why predatory? Well that’s an interesting question. If you search for the Beall’s list here on RG or for example:

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

You find that there is quite a vivid debate around exactly this point. If you search here on RG on predatory you find excellent advices on how to recognize whether a journal (or its publisher) is potentially predatory or not and to what extent the so-called Beall’s list can help answering this question.

In this particular case it is basically unknown why the publisher is included in the list (this is also one of the things why some criticize this list). The ‘logic’ behind the inclusion is that once the publisher is labelled potentially predatory then automatically all journals by that publisher are labelled as such as well.

If you ask me then this journal might be one of the examples where the Beall’s list is wrong. I estimate that a journal with:

-a Scopus indexing (for already quite some years) and a CiteScore 1.2

-a Clarivate (Web of Science) impact factor 0.822

-all papers have decent submission and acceptance date info suggesting proper peer review

-contact info and fee info seems ok and is transparent

-no list with meaningless indexing info

is not predatory. It seems to lack the ‘typical’ characteristics of a predatory journal. Unfortunately (in the past) inclusion in this notorious list is easier than getting delisted. Rightfully so or not but quite some organizations including universities take this list quite serious and I can only presume that this might be the reason why this journal is not included in the database you talked about.

Hope this clarifies the matter a bit.

Best regards.