Should papers in predatory journals be rejected by Researchgate? Where such papers had somehow been on Researchgate, should they be delisted or should be authors be left to go free and sin no more; what are your views?
Interesting question. Indeed, we must cling to quality on this important academic platform. Yet, we must be cautious in our labelling of predatory journals while branding all articles published there as trash and below-the-belt articles. The truth is many amateur researchers who carried out very rich studies ignorantly ended up publishing them in predatory journals! Should such valuable studies clothed in predatory journal be prevented and/or abolish on RG?
I suggest a more robust system on RG to detect the good, the bad and the ugly papers apart from a mere outlook of a paper's outer garment (herein journal) whether it is an IF journal or predatory.
Interesting question. Indeed, we must cling to quality on this important academic platform. Yet, we must be cautious in our labelling of predatory journals while branding all articles published there as trash and below-the-belt articles. The truth is many amateur researchers who carried out very rich studies ignorantly ended up publishing them in predatory journals! Should such valuable studies clothed in predatory journal be prevented and/or abolish on RG?
I suggest a more robust system on RG to detect the good, the bad and the ugly papers apart from a mere outlook of a paper's outer garment (herein journal) whether it is an IF journal or predatory.
This is a whole new venue for me. I knew about self-published books, but predatory journals. I gather these are non-peer edited mimicking professional journals, yes?
RG does not have the capacity to reject any paper since it is just a platform for sharing those resources.
Awareness is what is required for authors.
Also, some of our institutions that are young in paper publications that clamor for single authorship should learn fast that to publish in quality journals atimes require more author contributions and experience to make it robust and get accepted. Otherwise, many will deliberately do otherwise.
Thanks Jummy and John, yes some of the journals are here. On clamour for single authorship, I do not think any institution has the right to coerce any scholar into single or cooperative authorship. However the debate the world over has always been what credit do you give when a work is a joint worK by 2, 3, 7 etc scholars. I also think the debate even broke in the ‘big centers’ of knowledge and it has been with us for some time. Institutions have also adopted situation specific solutions to that. The solutions are diverse and I am aware some institutions hold workshops on this and other issues highlighting the diversities of practices and the path to take.
I belief every organization has a standard and standing policy that controls all their activities, hence it is expected of RG to adhere to this policy in checkmating all articles published on this platform
If RG has the capacity to do that without inadvertent errors, I think yes!
If RG has the capacity to do that without inadvertent errors, I think yes!
RG would need to educate members on its objectives and standards prior to making a declaration on which types of publication to hoist. Ultimately however, it would not be a bad idea for publications to be hoisted on the platform to get filtered through a panel at the 'gate'. For articles to be placed on RG to await 2 to 3 days of quality screening could be more like it.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Moral Philosophy
- Free Will