Perhaps this question is one of the most important questions that is concerned by the scientific community, especially with the increasing numbers of predatory journals. There are many interpretations, explanations, and judgments in answering this question. Can we define these criteria? I hope so....
For me, if I read a paper that discusses work that is my area of expertise and that discussion is simply incorrect, I doubt the credibility of the rest of the paper, and the editorial process of that journal.
I am seeing this happen more and more. It is most prevalent in open access journals. Though some are high quality, some are not. It is clear that papers are not reviewed correctly or the authors don't understand the science. This worries me greatly since these poor quality papers are now being cited in papers in highly respected journals. As time goes by, the errors in the original papers become seen as correct.
Sadly, the damage is done. I used to consider peer-reviewed papers as authoritative but now I am skeptical. Science shouldn't be that way.
Thanks a lot for your valuable answer dear John. The answer reflects your good experience and interest in this field....
Please accept my best wishes and regards.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers