Five (bad) reasons to publish your research in predatory journals

Abstract

practices is now much higher than even three years ago: predatory being defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as 'preying naturally on' and 'seeking to exploit' others.It has also never been easier to identify which journals and publishers are predatory-such as through Beall's list of predatory publishers (Beall 2016).Why then are so many nursing academic papers still published in predatory journals?As behavioural economists and evolutionary biologists would conclude: there must be reasons?Here we speculate on five (bad) reasons for so many nursing authors to ignore scholarly peer-reviewed journals, like JAN or its open access sister journal Nursing Open, and publish work in a predatory journal. I don't care about my external reputationPredatory journals, like most hunters, exploit the weaknesses of their prey.Academics express a rich variety of values in, but also through their work.This contributes welcome diversity to academic work and its settings.Yet, publication in peer-reviewed journals remains the most common currency of academic work and our main means to communicate with academic peers.Accordingly, jobs, progression and promotion depend heavily on the ability to continue to share research via journals.Predatory publishers particularly target inexperienced authors and researchers from poorer countries where higher education is less established (Xia et al. 2015).Such authors may assume that merely publishing will bring credibility and reputation to themselves and their employers.However, the worthiness of a publication is no longer inherent.The journal where your paper is published matters, and matters a lot.Vastly different levels of credibility can be

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 44 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.