PDF
Citation
Print
My day typically begins by checking my inbox. As usual, over 80% of the newly arrived emails are from unfamiliar senders, with subject lines like “Publicize your research work…”, “Discounted fee to publish your… (Oh, really?)”, “Share the innovative research with our…”, “First decision in a few days for your paper..” or “Invitation to join us as Editor-in-Chief…”.
As an editor managing a weekly journal, sifting through the flood of submitted manuscripts is no small task. Rejecting submissions, particularly through a “desk rejection” without review, often leads to unpleasant exchanges. Some disgruntled authors threat us, claiming they’ll “warn my colleagues never to submit to this journal,” while others pen scathing criticisms like, “Do you really have such a narrow and biased view of scholarship?”
One particularly memorable incident involved an author who, after sending an angry letter of protest over a rejection, followed up with another message. This time, he triumphantly announced, “I resubmitted my manuscript to a journal with a much higher impact factor than yours, and it was accepted in less than a week. You should be ashamed of your lack of insight for failing to recognize the value of my excellent research!” He even included the name of the journal and excerpts of the peer review comments.
The journal’s name was unfamiliar to me, and the “peer reviews” consisted of three remarkably brief sentences, all variations of “Your work is groundbreaking. That’s why we decided to publish it quickly.” For a moment, I considered drafting a polite note of caution, suspecting the author had fallen prey to “that” type of journal, but ultimately decided to refrain. Whatever befalls him, it is his own destiny.
At the regular meeting of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) held in New Zealand in November 2024, predatory or deceptive publishings emerged as a central topic of discussion. Following these in-depth deliberations, ICMJE member journals (including Journal of Korean Medical Science) issued a joint editorial highlighting the growing threat posed by predatory journals, agreeing to publish this statement simultaneously across all member journals.1
Prior to this, in August 2024, the Asia Pacific Association of Medical Journal Editors (APAME) annual conference was held in New South Wales, Australia, where the Sydney Declaration on predatory or pseudo journals and publishers was issued.2
This coordinated action underscores the escalating concern about predatory journals within the scientific research community. Despite their relatively short history of approximately two decades, these journals have proliferated rapidly, evolving in both scale and sophistication. Consequently, distinguishing between legitimate and predatory journals has become increasingly challenging, creating significant hurdles for researchers—particularly those in Korea.
In this review, I explore the origins and defining characteristics of academic journals, the rise of predatory journals, and the associated challenges, and will discuss potential countermeasures and future directions.
ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF JOURNALS
The origins of academic journals can be traced back to the mid-17th century, with the publications of the Royal Society of London.3 These early journals functioned primarily as newsletters, resembling letters that disseminated scientific news. Over time, they evolved into more specialized and systematic formats.
By the late 19th century, academic disciplines began to branch into distinct fields such as mathematics, physics, and biology, marking the introduction of rudimentary forms of peer review.
The IMRAD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion), now the standard for scientific papers, began gaining prominence after World War II. It was first adopted by the Vancouver Group in 1978 and officially formalized in 1997.45 This group later evolved into the present-day ICMJE.
Since then, the journal has maintained scientific integrity and fairness, becoming a vital academic platform for researchers worldwide. Notably, as the evaluation of individual researchers’ achievements and their promotions heavily relies on the scores of academic papers, journal publishing has evolved into a significant industry.
Go to : 
OPEN ACCESS (OA) PUBLISHING
Traditional journal publishing operated on a closed model reliant on subscription fees. However, as criticism over rising subscription costs and commercialization grew, the OA movement emerged in the early 2000s.6 OA is an open model that allows free online access to academic information, including downloading, copying, and distribution. While the OA movement was seen as a positive step towards addressing the closed nature and cost issues of traditional journals, it also created opportunities for predatory journals to exploit the model where authors bear publication costs.7
Go to :
THEN CAME THE PREDATORY JOURNAL
It is difficult to pinpoint the number of predatory journals, but in 2021, it was estimated to be more than 15,000.1 Therefore, as of 2025, there will be a lot more.
Predatory journals are exploitative entities that exist solely for commercial gain through article publication fees. They charge researchers for publication without conducting proper peer review, and they masquerade as legitimate academic journals.
The term “predatory” was coined in 2010 by Jeffrey Beall, then a librarian at the University of Colorado Denver.8
In 2008, he began to notice a sharp increase in suspicious spam emails soliciting submissions.9 His subsequent work led to the publication of a blog post that blacklisted predatory journals, marking the first public demonstration of their harmful nature and the beginning of the fight against them.10
His efforts and challenges greatly aided countless researchers worldwide, but he has inevitably faced fierce resistance, which continues to this day.11 In 2017, he had no choice but to remove his list.9 Opinions are divided on whether this was due to external pressure, organizational pressure, or the threat of a lawsuit, but the exact reason remains unknown.
But don’t be discouraged. Although Beall has closed his blog, several websites have copied and archived his list.1213 You can also view and search lists of legitimate journals on sites like the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ),14 or ‘Think. Check. Submit.’15 For Korean researchers, the Scholarly Ecosystem Against Fake Publishing Environment (SAFE), provided by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI), a government-funded organization, is particularly useful.16
• Firstly, these publishers are primarily driven by profit. They demand substantial fees from authors for publication, and even if authors, who were initially deceived, later realize the truth and wish to withdraw their articles, the publishers refuse to comply. It is akin to a form of hostage ransom.
• There is no peer review, or if there is, it is done very poorly. Usually, submitted articles are accepted very quickly without proper review or evaluation.
• They provide false information, manipulating impact factors or listing non-existent individuals as editors.
• They send out spam emails to researchers in large quantities to solicit submissions (I also receive a lot daily, as mentioned earlier in this review).
• They imitate the names or websites of reputable journals or create fakes by slightly altering a single word.
Their activities are becoming increasingly widespread, intertwined with the performance-based approach of some researchers. There are even cases where researchers intentionally use these journals, which is widely criticized.
Go to :
WHY ARE PREDATORY JOURNALS HARMFUL?
The reason is simple: they damage the integrity of science.91018 This impact is even more detrimental than the substantial fees they extract from authors.
Science must be conducted with rigorous verification. If flawed research continues to be accepted within a sloppy verification system, and predatory journals (or more precisely, deceptive journals) that enable such practices become widespread, the result will be a proliferation of unscrupulous scientists. This, in turn, will fuel pseudoscience and alternative medicine, ultimately misleading the public.
Can we confidently expect the public to discern truth from falsehood in such circumstances? Even now, a surprising number of people still adhere to beliefs such as the “Flat Earth” theory. The sentiment of “I know as much as you do!” could serve as a catalyst for the rise of anti-intellectualism.
Ultimately, this leads to a grim paradox: the negligence and ethical lapses of scientists pave the way for their own decline, undermining the credibility of science itself.
Go to :
HOW TO AVOID BEING MISLED BY PREDATORY JOURNALS
Predatory journals pose a significant threat to the integrity of science. They not only compromise researchers’ scholarly efforts and the credibility of scientific work but also impede the progress of the entire scientific community. Addressing this issue is not solely the responsibility of publishers or regulatory bodies. Above all, the ethical accountability and discernment of individual researchers are paramount.
Many have offered valuable insights on addressing the issue of predatory journals.171920 Based on these, we would like to explore ways to deal with predatory journals as follows.
Responsibility of authors and researchers: follow your conscience from the very beginning
While it may be uncomfortable to address, acknowledging an important truth is essential to finding a solution. Above all, authors must adhere to their conscience and maintain unwavering integrity in their work. Engagement with predatory journals is often not an accidental misstep but, in many cases, stems from a moment of self-deception by the authors themselves.
The success of predatory journals is not solely due to the fraudulent practices of unethical publishers. The situation is further compounded by the participation of some researchers—whether knowingly or inadvertently—in their activities. While some may intentionally exploit these outlets, others may fall victim to them unintentionally. Nevertheless, researchers must recognize and take responsibility for their role in addressing this issue.
Researchers must obey academic integrity and ethical principles rigorously from the very beginning of their work. During the process of writing a manuscript, one should not use the pressure of “Publish or Perish” as an excuse to compromise ethical standards. The impatience to quickly publish research findings often leads researchers to the allure of predatory journals. Even in such circumstances, it is crucial for researchers to adhere steadfastly to the principle of “Follow your conscience.”
Enhancing the ability to identify predatory journals
Researchers must develop the ability to discern whether a journal they are considering for submission is legitimate or predatory. To achieve this, the following guidelines are essential:
Familiarize yourself with the characteristics of predatory journals
• Lack of proper peer review processes.
• Excessive publication fees or disclosing costs only after the acceptance decision.
• Names and websites designed to mimic reputable journals.
• Unclear or falsified editorial information.
• Persistent and excessive spam emails soliciting submissions.
Journals displaying these characteristics should raise suspicion.
Actively utilize reliable verification tools
To avoid falling prey to predatory journals, researchers should actively use credible databases and resources, such as the DOAJ14 or the “Think, Check, Submit.”15 Of course, Korean researchers are strongly encouraged to utilize tools like the SAFE16 platform, which is tailored to their needs.
By adhering to these guidelines, researchers can better protect the integrity of their work and contribute to the credibility of the scientific community.
The role and ethics of OA publishers
The issue of predatory journals cannot be solely attributed to the actions or intentions of researchers. OA publishers also bear a significant responsibility to uphold rigorous quality control and adhere to the highest ethical standards.21
It is crucial to remain vigilant. The very nature of OA publishing, while offering numerous benefits, also makes it susceptible to exploitation. Without unwavering dedication to ethical standards, even esteemed publishers may fall prey to the seductive allure of unethical practices.
Villains are rarely evil from the beginning. At first, everyone was innocent. Orc was originally a beautiful elf, but it was created by submission to darkness and corruption. Gollum was an ordinary hobbit but turned ugly by giving up his own conscience.
By maintaining integrity and diligence, both researchers and publishers can safeguard the credibility of the scientific community.
OA publishers should:
1) Maintain transparency and rigor in peer review: Beware of the temptation to make it easier to publish by reducing or omitting the difficulty of peer review. This may seem like a short-term boost to the publisher, but in the long run, it can lead to the risk of being labeled a predatory journal.
2) Be careful not to pass on financial pressure to researchers: To address the inherent limitations of the OA model, which is the cost of publishing, publishers should work with governments, public institutions, and academic societies to build a sustainable financial structure.
3) Maintain trust and authority: Journals operate on the basis of trust in the scientific community. To maintain credibility, the journal should regularly disclose to researchers the review process, operational structure, and financial status of the journal.
Collaboration and regulation within the academic community, and the role of government intervention
Addressing the issue of predatory journals requires collective effort—not only from individual researchers but also from the broader academic community.
1) Expanding educational programs: Universities and research institutes should implement comprehensive educational programs to raise awareness about the characteristics and risks associated with predatory journals. Such training is particularly critical for early-career researchers, who may be more vulnerable to exploitation.
2) Strengthening international regulations: Governments and academic societies must collaborate to establish robust legal and institutional frameworks that sanction or eliminate predatory journal publishers.
3) Enhancing reliable journal databases: The transparency and credibility of established journal databases, such as Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science, should be reinforced. Efforts must be made to strictly exclude predatory journals from these platforms.
4) Government intervention: In the current situation where the problem of predatory journals is rapidly increasing, I believe that government intervention is necessary to some extent. In that respect, I think it is meaningful that the Sydney Declaration explicitly states government intervention.2 In Korea, a good example is the operation of SAFE16 by KISTI, a government-funded organization.
Go to :
FUTURE PERSPECTIVE
The problem of predatory journals is a serious threat to the ethical and structural foundations of scientific research. In particular, the current situation in which the definition and distinction of predatory journals are becoming increasingly ambiguous is driving this problem in a direction that is more complex and difficult to resolve. Considering this, looking ahead to the future of predatory journals and seeking solutions and countermeasures is not a simple task, but a serious problem directly related to the survival of the academic community.
A significant issue facing the academic community today is the increasingly blurred distinction between predatory and legitimate journals.22 In the past, predatory journals were relatively easy to identify due to their clear traits, such as the absence of peer review, dissemination of false information, and aggressive spam marketing. However, these journals have since adopted more sophisticated methods to mask their true nature, making detection increasingly difficult.
Notably, even previously reputable OA journals are now at risk of compromising their review standards or shifting towards fee-driven models. This concerning trend stems from structural challenges, including intensifying competition in the academic publishing industry, the relentless pressure on researchers to publish, and the commercial motivations of large publishers. As such, the issue cannot be solely attributed to the unethical practices of predatory publishers. Addressing this complex problem requires a nuanced understanding of its multifaceted causes and a concerted effort from all stakeholders in the academic community.
The widespread adoption of the OA model, which often involves publication fees, has further exacerbated this issue. As a result, scholars now face a challenging landscape where the credibility of a journal cannot be determined solely by the reputation of its publisher. The blurring of these lines calls for a more discerning approach to evaluating journals and a concerted effort to safeguard academic integrity.
Recent efforts to use artificial intelligence (AI) for screening predatory journals have garnered attention.23 While AI holds the potential to assess the reliability of journals through extensive data analysis and machine learning, the current state of technology still presents significant challenges, including a high rate of misidentification and uncertainty.2425
AI can evaluate the structure of journal websites, the format of articles, and the credentials of editorial boards, but it remains limited in its ability to fully recognize the complex and evolving deceptive tactics employed by predatory journals. This creates a dynamic where the pace of AI advancements must compete with the ever-adaptive strategies of predatory publishers. Consequently, while AI offers promising tools, it is not yet a foolproof solution for identifying predatory journals, and ongoing development and refinement are essential.
Go to :
CONCLUSION: ETHICS AND JUSTICE FOR SCIENTISTS
Predatory journals are not merely an issue within the publishing ecosystem but pose a profound challenge to the ethics and responsibilities of individual scientists. To address this issue, the scientific community must come together through collective cooperation, technological progress, and the ethical resolve of each researcher.
Ultimately, the solution to the problem of predatory journals depends on the conscience of both researchers and publishers. To safeguard academic integrity, researchers must resist short-term temptations and carefully evaluate journals before submitting their work. Publishers, on the other hand, must strike a balance between commercial interests and ethical practices, ensuring they maintain the trust of the academic community.
Scientists must engage in self-reflection, fulfill their responsibilities, and prioritize their academic conscience, thus fostering a just and sustainable research environment. This commitment is essential not only for the integrity of scientific work but also for passing on a healthy academic foundation to future generations of researchers. Only through these efforts can we secure the long-term sustainability of the scientific community.
Go to :
XML Download