Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

UKSG 2018 Breakout - Should we really be worried about predatory publishers? - Dobson

303 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Does the notion of 'predatory' publishing alarm, confuse or amuse you? This session will consider what makes a publisher predatory, who is affected by so-called predatory publishers and how the scholarly community is responding to the perceived threats such publishers pose.

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

UKSG 2018 Breakout - Should we really be worried about predatory publishers? - Dobson

  1. 1. 1 April 2018 Should we really be worried about predatory publishers? HELEN DOBSON Scholarly Communications Manager The University of Manchester Library @h_j_dobson
  2. 2. Jeffrey Beall Scholarly Communications Librarian, University of Colorado, Denver Your pledge A picture of Jeffrey Beall. Uploaded on his Flickr account. CC-BY 2.0
  3. 3. The phrase • ‘Predatory publishers’ • “there is always the possibility of engaging in unethical behaviour to chase large profit margins and the publishing industry is no different” Raju (2018) • Assessment criteria https://beallslist.weebly.com/upl oads/3/0/9/5/30958339/criteria- 2015.pdf • Potential, possible or probable predatory publishers/journals A challenge • #predatorypublisher • https://beallslist.weebl y.com/ • A different lens Blacklists BEALL’S LEGACY
  4. 4. Subjectivity • Individual view • “No single person or source is equipped to bear the responsibility of being the ultimate authority on what constitutes as a best (or poor) practice scholarly publishing outlet” Pleffer & Shrubb (2017) • Criteria not limited to OA journals • “development of additional criteria that focuses on subject content” Olivarez et al (2018) • Conferences Angle • Geographical slant • “intolerance is a reflection of inward thinking and a superiority complex” Raju, 2018 Completeness CRITIQUING THE CRITERIA
  5. 5. EXTRA CRITERIA..? Librarians and publishers • Increased transparency • Increased affordability • Liaison with OA publishers • Payment on delivery • No paid-for fast-track publication option • Refunds for errors Authors and publishers • Clarity on peer review process/length • Clarity on costs • User-friendly systems • Get out option • Clarity on value- added/benefits
  6. 6. ‘BEALL’S’ LIST II https://beallslist. weebly.com/
  7. 7. CABELLS BLACKLIST
  8. 8. CABELLS BLACKLIST
  9. 9. WHAT CAN LIBRARIANS DO? • Change the focus from journal to article • Review publishing training/support • Facilitate peer support • Advocate for OA small presses/new journals
  10. 10. WHAT CAN OTHER SERVICES DO? • Review inclusion criteria regularly? (Ulrichs, RoMEO, DOAJ, OASPA) • Review application criteria regularly? (ISSN, Crossref)
  11. 11. ACTIVITY • Discuss questions in groups • Feedback using Trello link https://trello.com/b/KdnYM2pQ/uksg-predatory- publishers
  12. 12. helen.j.dobson@manchester.ac.uk @h_j_dobson THANK YOU

×