Dear it is not necessary reviewing papers for predatory journals except they charge to become reliable and viable journals.

Hi Sarafa.

The question is relevant and I think that before giving an answer, it is necessary to analyze two very important points. The first has to do with the "academic market", this neoliberal vision of research, where everything passes through certifications and mass production. Faced with this situation, which is presented as an attractive business niche, appear predatory journals that publish everything and fast. They are called so because they offer everything in a complex process, in a snap of fingers, that is, hyper fast; leaving many doubts about its quality and seriousness. The second has to do with the other part of the process, researchers who seek to publish because they need it and feel overwhelmed by doing so. Many of these works are good jobs, they are serious jobs, products of formal research processes (we should review according to our disciplinary competences), but there are also many articles of dubious quality, which look for predatory journals just for the convenience of publishing and publish quickly, without having any problem paying anything.

Lastly, regarding your question. Any investigative process that ends in a publishable product must be reviewed and arbitrated / evaluated. If this task will mean a value to you, go ahead. Evaluate, because you can find good contributions. If it's what you like, you have the time and it will also represent something positive, go ahead. Evaluate the papers.

My final recommendation is not to discard the articles just for being in a predatory jpurnals, better review it, read it and make a decision. If what we are reviewing or reading is worth considering and continuing to build knowledge, go ahead. "Let's not judge a book by its cover"

I think any act that support or motivates something which is not truly ethical or grounded is not worth it and you did just that when you agree to review for such journals. While I completely understand César Jiménez-Yanez point of view. However, authors/researchers should be competent enough to identify the authenticity of the journals and by doing so they can at least reached maximum audience and many will be benefitted by their findings. As a researcher I don't want good evidence to get stuck somewhere when it can be of great help to many. Having said that, you have the accountability also as a researcher to create an awareness on predatory journals and how to prevent researchers from being sucked into their unethical practice.

I agree with both @César E. Jiménez Yañez and @Theophilus Lakiang

Thank you @Emmanuel Ifeanyi Obeagu, @César E. Jiménez Yañez, @ Theophilus Lakiang and @Mala Babagana Gutti for your contributions.

I am of the opinion that the phrase "predatory journal" says everything that needs to be said and provides an answer to the question in and of itself.

Thank you Janet McClellan but are you suggesting that researchers should not accept any invitation to review manuscript from predatory journals, irrespective of the manuscript's quality?

Hello Sarafa,

In looking at predatory journals who nominally require an author to pay exorbitant fees to have their materials published, I am saying they are 'predatory' and the question of their legitimacy is a gaping hole. As for reviewers, they are unpaid as is usual in publishing but their involvement in predatory journals means in some way and at some level complicit in the continuation of predatory journals. Such journals prey on academia to line their pockets and trick the unwary and new faculty into publishing with them in their worthless journals. This does not enhance the reputation of the researcher who has spent their time, effort, and energies developing their research; rather, they ultimately do harm to that researcher and the discipline of study.

It is not about the quality of the submitted manuscript... it is about the quality of the publication/journal. If the manuscript has quality then publishing in a predatory (read fake and/or fraudulent) journal is of no value and if a researcher publishes in such, they might ultimately be considered 'fraudulent' themselves.

There is a reason they are called predatory. SO, being a part of a predatory system is, for me, a matter for the person considering being a reviewer and their conscience, ethics, and integrity as a professional. I leave it to the individual but not without a caution as to what such involvement might ultimately do to their own credibility.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wiki definition & discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_open-access_publishing

Beall's List of Predatory Journals at https://beallslist.weebly.com/

More info... https://journosdiary.com/2017/09/05/india-ugc-white-list-predatory-journals/

Another... https://guides.library.yale.edu/c.php?g=296124&p=1973764

@Janet McClellan, you have a very valid point. Thank you for supporting your point with such splendid explanation.

You are very kind. Thank you for your response. The best to you.