20
Predatory journals: how to recognise them
How to recognise predatory journals by invitations, timelines, editorial boards, indexing and fees. A practical verification routine before submission.
Predatory journals imitate legitimate scholarly publishing, but behind the promise of publication there may be no proper editorial work, transparent peer review or genuine indexing. A single warning sign rarely proves that a journal is predatory. The safer approach is to look for a pattern and verify every important claim in the primary source.
Seven red flags
First, a mass email full of praise about work that is only loosely related to your field. Second, a promise to accept and publish a full research paper within a few days. Third, a metric with a name that resembles a recognised impact factor but comes from an unknown organisation.
Fourth, an editorial board whose members cannot be confirmed on university or research-institution pages. Fifth, a hidden or constantly changing editorial address and legal information. Sixth, publication fees that appear only after acceptance. Seventh, claims of indexing that disappear when you search the official database directly.
Check the source, not the badge
If a website says “Indexed in Scopus”, search the official Scopus source list by journal title and ISSN. The same principle applies to Web of Science. For open-access journals, DOAJ is useful when the journal claims to be listed there, but absence from DOAJ alone does not prove that a journal is predatory.
DOAJ requires journals in its directory to meet transparency and open-access criteria, including clear licensing and editorial information. Inclusion is a positive signal, not a universal guarantee of the quality of every article or editorial decision.
The editorial board should exist outside the journal website
Choose three names and verify them independently. Does the person actually work at the stated institution? Is the journal mentioned in their institutional biography or professional profile? Does their research field make sense for the journal? Scholars' names have sometimes been used without permission.
A very large board without clear roles is not necessarily more credible than a small one. What matters is whether the people and affiliations are verifiable.
A fee does not make a journal predatory
Many legitimate open-access journals charge an APC. The problem is not payment itself but opacity and the replacement of editorial judgment with the sale of acceptance. Fees should be disclosed before submission, and the publication decision should not depend on whether the author can pay a hidden invoice.
What to do if you have already submitted
Do not panic. Read the terms you accepted during submission. If there are serious reasons to doubt the journal and the paper has not been published, request withdrawal in writing and keep the correspondence. Do not submit the same manuscript elsewhere until the status of the first submission is clearly resolved.
If the paper has already been published, the situation is more complicated. You cannot simply pretend that the publication does not exist. Discuss the case with your institution, supervisor, research office or librarian to determine how the paper should be reported and whether further action is appropriate.
A ten-minute check
1. Find the ISSN and publisher. 2. Verify every indexing claim in the database itself. 3. Inspect 5–10 recent articles: are submission and acceptance dates shown, do DOI records work, is the editing coherent? 4. Verify three members of the editorial board outside the journal website. 5. Find the full price before submission. 6. Read the peer-review and ethics policies. 7. For an open-access journal, check DOAJ if the journal claims to be listed there.
Blacklists and whitelists
There is no universal permanent list. Old blacklists become outdated quickly, while absence from a whitelist may simply mean that the journal is new or outside the list's subject coverage. Prefer current official databases and checklists from research libraries. COPE and transparency initiatives in scholarly publishing also provide criteria for evaluating publishers' practices.
Do not base a decision on a single aggregator. A journal can change owner, policy, title or publishing model.
A red flag is not proof by itself
A young legitimate journal may have little citation history. A responsible open-access journal may charge an APC. An editor may personally invite authors. The problem is the combination: guaranteed acceptance in days, unclear review, false indexing, a fictitious editorial board and hidden fees.
Whenever a journal attributes a claim to another organisation, verify the claim there. If it says “indexed in database X”, look for the title and ISSN in database X. If it advertises an “impact factor”, identify who calculates it. Similar-looking metric names are sometimes designed to imitate recognised indicators.
Fake websites of real journals
Another risk is the hijacked or cloned journal website. Fraudsters copy the name and visual identity of a genuine title, replace the contact details and then collect manuscripts and payments. Visual appearance is therefore poor evidence. Confirm the domain and contact information through the publisher, a trusted library catalogue or a verifiable database record. If different reliable sources point to different websites, do not pay or send unpublished data until the discrepancy is resolved.
If you have already paid
Save emails, invoices, the publication terms and screenshots or copies of the page describing the service. Request clarification or a refund in writing if the terms were breached. If the manuscript has not been published, separately record your withdrawal and request confirmation that the journal will not publish it.
Only after that should you prepare the next submission. Many journals prohibit simultaneous submission of the same manuscript, so documented closure of the earlier attempt matters.
Further options depend on payment method, country and publication status.
Absence from one directory is not an automatic verdict if that directory does not cover the journal's field or publishing model. A strong assessment combines independent checks of the publisher, editorial board, review process, publication archive, indexing and terms for authors.
Where to explain the research to a wider audience
Even after choosing a legitimate scientific journal, you may still want to explain the work to non-specialists. That is a different genre. A popular-science column does not receive scientific peer review and should never be used as a substitute for it.
What Columnist provides
Through Columnist, a researcher can publish an accessible explanation of the work in Science Official or another suitable Mosaic publication in the relevant language. The article carries an author card and is collected on an author page. The service does not confer scientific status and does not promise scientific-journal indexing.
After checking the scientific journal, explain the result to a wider audience through Columnist, at columnist.mib.news.
FAQ
Does fast publication always mean a predatory journal?
No. Some legitimate formats move quickly. The concern is a combination of unrealistic promises, opaque review, questionable indexing and hidden fees.
Does an APC mean that a journal is bad?
No. Many reputable open-access journals are funded through APCs. Check whether the fee is transparent and whether editorial decisions are independent of payment.
Can I trust an email saying “we found your outstanding work”?
The email itself proves nothing. If the invitation is unrelated to your specialty or looks mass-produced, treat it as marketing and assess the journal independently.
Does DOAJ guarantee quality?
DOAJ applies open-access and transparency criteria, so inclusion is useful evidence. Authors still need to assess scope, editorial practices and the journal's specific conditions.
Reading is half of it. The other half is a column with your name on it, in a real publication.
Start writing