Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 13:29:13 +0900
Clara, thanks for the clarification. I wholly understand that there has been much focus on the part about "researchers" publishing in these predatory journals.
I just wanted to point out that we should pay more attention about the RISK the predatory journals pose by allowing "fake research" to be published, and not just pay attention on the part "researchers" publishing in these journals.
The idea of predatory journals are not new, and we have been raising alarm for these journals starting with the Beall's list, etc. But we haven't pushed that hard because first, it is difficult to draw a clear line between predatory and ordinary journals, and second, because we were implying that these journals provide ways for weak research--preliminary results, minor research topics, research from non-western countries, research of beginning-researchers--to be published. As far as the weak research are not "fake research," it has its own benefits to be published, one for the career of the researcher, and also for the sake of research diversity. If we allow only research which appear in high-impact journals, we will miss research which might not be very sexy/attractive but which fill the gap and form the base of research and research which might not be of great interest for cutting-edge science but might be of interest of the local community. For instance, if I'm doing research which solves issues in Japan, it interests Japanese community very much, but it is very hard to convince the mostly-western-dominated peer-reviewers of high impact journals to get the article through, especially in non-STEM fields.
With the notion that predatory journals also have its benefits and also that it often times quite easy to avoid the really ill-intended predatory journals as they are quite obvious--charging high APC, not peer-reviewing, sometimes even not publishing--, I have been quite generous on the existence of predatory journals. But if they serve as a bed where "fake research" can be published which could mislead the society and also ultimately destroy the trust in academic research, I think the academic community should take control of these predatory journals.
Miho Funamori
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <
[log in to unmask]>
> On Behalf Of LIBLICENSE
> Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 9:17 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Predatory journals and the Indian Express
>
> From: "Ginther, Clara ([log in to unmask])" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 11:39:02 +0000
>
> Yes, fake research was one focus of the research, the other, in Germany and
> Austria, was about researchers publishing in these journals. One of the
> headlines in German media was: More than 5000 German researchers published
> in predatory journals. The journalists analyzed 175.000 articles as to the
> authorship, naming and shaming specific institutions. I have been interviewed by
> the Deutschlandfunk, a colleague of mine and I by an Austrian magazine. The
> questions we were asked were to a good part about why researchers fall
> prey/decide to publish in predatory journals and about the university we work
> for
> - is there an awareness, do we know of specific cases, what does the university
> do about it, how do we assist researchers... The following German media
> focused on academic researchers publishing in predatory journals. This is not
> comprehensive:
>
> o „Die Anziehungskraft der Fake Journals“:
> > https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/fake-science-die-anziehungskraft-der-wi
> > ssenschaftlichen.1773.de.html?dram:article_id=423281
> >
> > o „Wissenschaftler in den Fängen von Raubverlegern“:
> > https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/scheinkonferenz-wissenschaftler-in-den-
> > faengen-von.1773.de.html?dram:article_id=423268
> >
> > o „ Problem Pseudojournale "nicht wirklich lösbar“ :
> > https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/fake-science-problem-pseudojournale-nic
> > ht-wirklich-loesbar.676.de.html?dram:article_id=423465
> >
> > - Standard, „Tausende Forscher publizieren in Pseudo-Journalen“:
> > https://derstandard.at/2000083778590/Tausende-Wissenschaftler-veroeffe
> > ntlichen-in-Pseudo-Fachzeitschriften
> >
> > - Süddeutsche, „Forscher müssen ständig publizieren – das schadet der
> > Wissenschaft“:
> > https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/forschungspolitik-wir-brauchen-ein-
> > guetesiegel-fuer-wissenschaftsjournale-1.4061246
> >
> >- „Forscher täuschen bei Veröffentlichungen“:
> > https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/Forscher-taeuschen-ueber-
> > Jahre-bei-Veroeffentlichungen,wissenschaftsskandal100.html
> >
> > - Fake Science – Fälle auch in Hamburg“:
> >
> https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/hamburg/Fake-Science-Faelle-auch-in-Ham
> > burg,fakescience184.html
> >
> > - „Warum Forscher auf unseriösen Wegen publizieren“:
> > https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/Der-grosse-Wissenschafts-
> > Schwindel,wissenschaftsskandal102.html
> >
> > - Radio Bremen, „Bremer Wissenschaftler im Netz von
> Scheinverlegern“:
> > https://www.butenunbinnen.de/nachrichten/wissen/fake-science-uni-breme
> > n-100.html
>
>
> Clara Ginther
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miho Funamori <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 19:38:57 +0900
>
> As far as I understand it, the issue here is NOT that there have been many
> academic researchers, even prominent researchers, publishing in predatory
> journals. The point is, that any fake research by even non-academics can be
> published on such journals as “scientific article,” which could mislead the
> society and policy-makers in decision-making and ultimately could destroy the
> trust in science.
>
> Pharmaceutical companies, even big ones such as Bayer, are using the
> predatory journals to have some academic evidence for their drugs to be
> approved. Tobacco concern and power plants are publishing articles to prove
> their safeness. Climate-skeptics publish articles in favor of their claim. Since the
> predatory journals publish without peer-review, these dubious articles gets
> published. As these articles based on fake research mix up with articles based
> on evidence-based scientific research, there is no way to distinguish between
> real science and fake research.
>
> The 30 min TV special (below link) the German media has made reports these
> facts and argues that predatory journals allows people to manipulate the
> “truth.”
>
> The program is in German. But it may be worth just watching the first scene. It
> starts with a story of a woman who was suffering cancer. She was hanging her
> hope on GcMAF, some new drug to cure cancer, which she found on an
> article—apparently published on a predatory journal. GcMAF could not give the
> cure she desperately longed for and she died.
>
> [ARD Mediathek] (2019.7.23)
> Exclusiv im Ersten: Fake Science - Die Lügenmacher
>
> https://www.ardmediathek.de/tv/Reportage-Dokumentation/Exclusiv-im-Erst
> en-Fake-Science-Die-L/Das-Erste/Video?bcastId=799280&documentId=5440
> 9800
>
> I have written a report on this. Unfortunately, it is in Japanese. So, not many
> would be able to read.
>
> https://rcos.nii.ac.jp/miho/2018/08/20180802/
>
> Miho
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> FUNAMORI, Miho
> Associate Professor, Information and Society Research Division Strategy
> Manager, Research Center for Open Science and Data Platform NATIONAL
> INSTITUTE OF INFORMATICS
>
> 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, 101-8430, Japan
> Tel: +81-3-4212-2550
> URL: http://www.nii.ac.jp/en/faculty/society/funamori_miho/
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]