I am not aware of any. I wish there was a list of journals that had been investigated but not added to the Blacklist. Thank you. Access to the white list has been provided as a method for our staff and faculty to identify safe and reputable publishers for their papers. The value of the whitelist – improved research reputation and attractiveness to funders – is hard to calculate. suggest you ‘may’ be acting as Marketing Agents for selling Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. Is there any requirement that they license these databases at all? The Journal Blacklist allows these key decision-makers to easily and confidently vet the publication records of candidates to ensure important positions and limited funds are protected. The price tag for this list is predatory; it does not matter how you spin it. Besides the Blacklist, the Cabell’s also publishes a Whitelist of journals, and both the lists can be accessed for a fee at the company’s website, www.cabells.com. The Blacklist was designed to take the place of the controversial Beall’s List, which had recently shut down after being operated out of the library office of Jeffrey Beall … Besides the Blacklist, the Cabell’s also publishes a Whitelist of journals, and both the lists can be accessed for a fee at the company’s website, www.cabells.com. The constant harassment and lawsuits are the reason why no one picked up his efforts when his university finally pulled the plug (said to have happened due to mounting lawsuit threats from Frontiers). My intention was to spin-out why I wouldn’t want to see a publisher-pays APC-like model here and also obliquely raise the prospect that there might be other funding models that would make free access to the data possible – if libraries were willing to do something like subscribe-to-open (and if Cabells was willing to pursue that model – I can imagine reasons that they might not). is this not just another attempt to commodify academia (despite best intentions)? Cabells introduces two new important features: the Journal Blacklist, the only blacklist of deceptive and predatory academic journals, and Altmetric Reports, a measurement of journal media mention data. Rick, While I am glad a new, more rigorously policed resource exists for academics without the time or know-how to check for legitimate publications, I am concerned that it is a subscription based service. If the journal does not have a publisher use the Standalone Journals list. I’m not sure I’ve understood your comment 100%, but I can tell you that the criteria for inclusion in the Blacklist have already been revealed. I guess that this might generate more revenue. That shifts the issue away from IFs of citing journals, to author quality or article quality metrics, solely. Have a great Weekend and Cinco deMayo. In 2015, Cabells began working with Jeffrey Beall, the creator of Beall's list, on developing a new list of predatory journals.In early 2017, Beall's list was abruptly taken offline, leading to speculation that Cabells was involved in the list's removal; the company denied any involvement. My original review identified several strengths of the new Blacklist as well as a few areas in need of improvement. Actually Cabell´s do sell advertising : https://www2.cabells.com/advertising This is why we can’t have nice things. Original list. But of course there are many other criteria to examine, too. So, unlike some other data sharing portals, I don’t think publisher funding is an option here without a lot of conflict of interest issues. Apparently it is displayed in their bi-weekly e-newsletter called The Source, which is sent to their subscribers. To me, the so-called predatory publishing issue is worse than it was several years ago with some major players offering what I call “Gray-Lit Journals” that produce articles with a good veneer of reputability: nice layout, doi numbers, in CrossRef, indexed in Google Scholar. Cabells’ Journal Whitelist and Blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations INTRODUCTION. Who’s their target market? Company could make money by placing paid Advertisements within the Cabell’s Blacklist and other sister publications on the internet. Do you not see a vested interest there? You got my point? A tally of journals that an American analytics firm, Cabells, believes to falsely claim to peer-review submissions, amounted, on a recent day, to 8,699—more than double the number of a year ago. It seems Yours constant defending this publishing company of Cabell’s Blacklist, etc. Well yes, of course. The Cabell’s International Blacklist covers approximately 12000 titles, significantly expanding the resources offered to scholars to manage the predatory journal threat. We all know the journals that matter to our professions. Perhaps you would disagree. What do you know about their Plight ans strugle to publish their research work countrd toward the Acaddmic Degree and/or And Oh Yes, about the Claims made by Mr. Anderson, or you, or me or anyone in any public portal or legitmate business or Public Forum Discussion at anytime and place can be investigated and verified through algorithm one way or other without doubt. It is worth persuing with the direct or indirect baking of legitmate consortium of NOT FAKE and NOT PREDATORY Journals and their Publishing Houses. To end this discussion — I’m happy this product exists, because otherwise, post-Beall, no such list seems to have arisen. The journal is open access but no information is given about how the journal is supported financially (i.e. Blacklists, like whitelists, suffer from several limitations: Teixeira da Silva, J.A., Tsigaris, P. (2018) What value do whitelists and blacklists have in academia? Disclosure: When Cabell’s was in the early stages of planning for the creation of this product, I did a few hours of paid consulting work for them and later contributed to a Cabell’s-organized conference panel discussion on the topic of predatory publishing. It promised a tool that can be used by authors needing help deciding where to publish, by academics and other employers seeking to check the legitimacy of job applicants’ claimed applications or editorial board memberships, or anyone else interested in monitoring the behavior of deceptive publishers. A 2015 study by researchers at the Hanken School of Economics in Finland found that “predatory” publishing skyrocketed between 2010 and 2014, during which the number of scholarly articles published in journals on Beall’s list increased nearly tenfold. Cabell’s has a third product beside the “Whitelist” and “Blacklist”, namely “Author Services” https://cabells.editage.com/. Now it turns out that it is a matter for the discretion of the experts. The product now functions well in the Safari browser. The tool is useful for collection development and for authors. Worse, it’s rather difficult to find the details of that policy unless one is a subscriber to the service — I finally had to ask where it was, at which point I was directed to the question “How do I get a specific journal removed from the Blacklist?” on Cabell’s publicly-facing FAQs page. A journal website with spelling and grammar errors wouldn’t accumulate many points, for example, but evidence of plagiarized articles or … I am not sure if a discontinued free service is better off being handled in the private sector. Most notably, these include: In addition to these important strengths, I can now report that some the problems I reported in 2017 have been resolved. I suggested a business model to Cabell’s back before the list launched, but so far they haven’t been able to implement it: What I want as a publisher is a tool that I can run on every manuscript I accept, a tool which will check the references in that manuscript and flag any that are to journals which are on the blacklist. Yes, one way to ensure that a journal is legitimate is to see how often it is cited by reputable journals. Many are complicit in the process and are seeking a shortcut to publication. The Journal Blacklist Review Board uses the following criteria to evaluate all journals suspected of deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory practices. Then my editors can raise questions about the reference with the authors. –I entirely agree that a quality product costs money. And is it possible to be included in the Blacklist only on account of the criteria of, for example, MODERATE group? Those interested in a quote should contact email@example.com.). Are their prices such that an individual author could subscribe at a modest cost before submitting an article, or is it only for institutional subscriptions? "The subscription of Cabells is vital to our AACSB accreditation. Easier to be a subscriber for your own campus than be a public supporter of a blacklist? I am not sure those of us from developing countries, especially Africa can afford these charges. This is the largest database we are aware of … Further, where would Cabell’s display such ads, and who would those advertisers be? I still recommend that these be expanded, and would particularly urge Cabell’s to make it possible to search by violation type. It means only that the journal no longer meets all of Cabell’s criteria for inclusion in the Whitelist. Due to constant problems with Weebly service, we decided to move to an independent server. SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing. Cabells and Inera present free webinar: Flagging Predatory Journals to Fight “Citation Contamination” November 4, 2020 November 18, 2020 Simon Linacre Academic Publishing , Predatory publishing , Predatory Reports So strange. The blacklist is new to the market and it remains unclear if it is a viable product, hence a lower price (at least until it established itself). I don’t grudge them charging something, but US$57,000 per year for access (what our library was quoted) does seem excessive to me. The model makes no sense at all on so many levels that it’s not really worth considering. So unless your institution is publishing 500 predatory journal articles a year and you have employed academics who do not know who the top people in their field are and where they publish, then I agree that US$57,000 a year is too much. In June 2020, Cabells changed the name of its whitelist and blacklist to Journalytics and Predatory Reports, respectively. The Cabells list uses 65 criteria, each of which is assigned a certain number of points, to determine a journal’s legitimacy. “Free” is a price we all love, of course — except when it’s the price offered for our labor. Companies have learned to use (or exclude) certain words to make their corporate filings be interpreted more positively by financial ML algorithms. If not read carefully, that notice could be misinterpreted as an indication that Cabell’s is a division of Clarivate. Personnel at Cabell’s use a transparent list of over 60 behavioral indicators when screening journals, and they update their criteria as needed. Currently, we do not offer subscriptions to the Whitelist or Blacklist at an individual level; the majority of our subscribers are academic institutions and pricing varies based on institutional size. Through careful analysis of these and similar behaviors, we developed a scoring rubric that is applied in the investigation of each journal. Likewise, not all government or granting agencies, responsible for dispersing limited research funds, are experts in the field(s) under consideration. In this context, see: https://thinkchecksubmit.org/ Think how useful it would be as a Crossref data point. The cost of all that training, desirable though it may be, would be far greater than the cost of the subscription. Cabell’s Blacklist Violations This policy establishes the criteria for identifying deceptive, fraudulent, and/or predatory journals for inclusion in The Journal Blacklist. The idea of having this sort of service performed as a charitable act for the research community is a noble one. You don’t discuss what that means in your analysis. Beall’s List had offered a mixed bag of benefits and problems from the start, and Cabell’s (publisher of a long-respected serials directory) sought to create a more rigorous and consistent version of the same service. Thank you for making it. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers. What’s Hot and Cooking In Scholarly Publishing, [N.B: As of 2020, this product has been renamed Predatory Reports.]. But the value of the blacklist is easy – how much money did your institution lose to scammers last year? If Google, Facebook, YouTube and other countless public search portals makes heathy and sustained living through advertisements model while providing Free access and search facilities. This seems to have gone off the rails a bit. Some offenses receive a much higher score than others.” https://www2.cabells.com/blacklist-criteria. Doesn’t say much for us as a species when it comes to long-term thinking. It would be good if someone from Cabell’s were to speak up here. Two years on, I’m pleased to announce that the product has both deepened and strengthened, and that while a couple of quirks remain to be remedied, Cabell’s Blacklist is now a very solid product. The author of the page declare: “After Jeffrey Beall took down his list of predatory journals in January 2017 in order to avoid continued harassment and threats, a small group of scholars and information professionals decided to anonymously rebuild and resurrect that list.” https://predatoryjournals.com/about/ Join us to learn more about these and other key resources while getting familiar with the new Cabells brand identity and website interface. In order to be more useful for consumers of published literature Cabells needs create an API or license their data for integration with other content sets. I’m especially wondering if they’re institutions so researchers can actually use it, or if they’re publishers, or other. Our pricing varies based on the size of the institution, duration of the subscription, and of course, the products/disciplines included (i.e. If you want a rigorous, high-quality service, it’s likely that it will cost money. The list of journals under review for the Blacklist still includes no indication as to why each title is under review. However as we saw from Beall’s efforts (highly flawed efforts, by the way — see https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/16/parting-company-with-jeffrey-beall/ and https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/08/10/defending-regional-excellence-in-research-or-why-beall-is-wrong-about-scielo/ ), it does not seem to be a feasible activity without significant financial backing. The first category includes behaviors that directly indicate deception and are weighted heavily as a result. Unfortunately, this new version of Beall’s List perpetuates many of the problems of the original: most notably a lack of clarity as to why any individual journal is included, and complete opacity as to the appeals process (if there is one; this may be what’s intended by the term “pull request”). It’s kind of a horrifying prospect! More information on how are addressing Rick’s observations, as well as updates on plans going forward can be found in the latest post to our blog, The Source: https://blog.cabells.com/2019/05/08/feedback-loop/, Hear about the impact of our career development programs first hand in the latest episode of our Early Career podcast. He has worked previously as a bibliographer for YBP, Inc., as Head Acquisitions Librarian for the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, as Director of Resource Acquisition at the University of Nevada, Reno, and as Associate Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication at the University of Utah. But being angry because someone isn’t willing to give their hard work and investment away for free does not solve the problem. Interested readers can see for themselves how severe those infractions were, and thus decide for themselves how concerned they are about publishing with that journal (or how concerned they should be to see a colleague publish in it). No, this product is not owned by, nor affiliated with Clarivate. Cabells' has curated a list of over 11,000 academic journals over 18 disciplines and a 100s of publishers. Did you read the entire post? Cabell’s doesn’t assign scores to its various inclusion criteria, though it does categorize the criteria as either “minor,” “moderate,” or “severe.” So in practice, what it looks like is that each entry for a blacklisted includes language that says which of the criteria led to its blacklisting. [N.B. So, your once again defending this company would not go well with those students, researchers and universities around the world. Not all administrators and department heads are experts in each field for which they must review candidates to hire, promote or tenure. (This was actually true of Beall’s List, too: it was paid for by Beall and–to the degree that he used UCD resources to develop and support it–his employer.). May be it is beyond the comprehension of the Company (which want to sell rather than distribute it freely as a public service) what public service especially for the Academia means. That said, should academics and their institutions be paying such prices for what could potentially be a flawed whitelist / blacklist? So we have a white list and a blacklist, but also a gray list. It must be highlighted heres that not every one as individual especially those university PhD Research Students, Research Scholars, and as orgainzation such as most Universities in the under-developed and poor countries would not be able afford to subscribe such paid subscription of list. Most probably you are right. All journals published by a predatory publisher are potentially predatory unless stated otherwise. If you seriously think that the market for a journals blacklist is of similar scale to the market for Google, Facebook, and YouTube, then there’s very little reason to continue this discussion. Sorry if that came of differently than I intended. We have defined standards for journal publication quality. Editage, aims to accelerate global scientific research communication. Will this dampen enthusiasm for transformative agreements? Cabell’s Blacklist is not limited to open access journals, as it includes journals published by the large publishing companies. I have good library services through my employer, but we don’t have subscription, and my local Midsize University doesn’t subscribe. The Blacklist was designed to take the place of the controversial Beall’s List, which had recently shut down after being operated out of the library office of Jeffrey Beall for about five years. Gasp! First, what journal is going to pay to be blacklisted? $57K for a yearly subscription for one library is definitely more. Violations in a category are analyzed against other violations in that same category and each is given a score based on how serious it is compared to the other violations in the category. International Journal of Chemoinformatics and Chemical Engineering (IJCCE) Show 19 Indices | View Journal. Cabell's Scholarly Analytics helps you to determine which journals typically publish manuscripts similar to yours or could be the best fit for your manuscript. Just Nobel thoughts you say! 60 Thoughts on "Cabell’s Predatory Journal Blacklist: An Updated Review". Despite short comings, Bealls list was publicly available. The index in each Directory helps you match the characteristics of your manuscript to the topic areas the journal emphasizes, as well as bibliometrics, journal ranking and acceptance rate. A few minor issues persist from the earlier version of the Blacklist. After all, the public is the final user of whatever is derived from scientific endevours and its products (papers are just one of them). I’m not sure where you took that quote from (“each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense”) — it’s not from my review. But I’m with you on $57K being too much. —— BEALLSLIST.NET —— BEALL'S LIST OF PREDATORY JOURNALS AND PUBLISHERS. To Support Customers in Easily and Affordably Obtaining the Latest Peer-Reviewed Research, Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), International Journal of 3-D Information Modeling (IJ3DIM), International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI), International Journal of Adaptive, Resilient and Autonomic Systems (IJARAS), International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), International Journal of Advanced Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (IJAPUC), International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems (IJATS), International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems (IJAEIS), International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI), International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics (IJABE), International Journal of Applied Evolutionary Computation (IJAEC), International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research (IJAGR), International Journal of Applied Industrial Engineering (IJAIE), International Journal of Applied Logistics (IJAL), International Journal of Applied Management Sciences and Engineering (IJAMSE), International Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computing (IJAMC), International Journal of Art, Culture and Design Technologies (IJACDT), International Journal of Artificial Life Research (IJALR), International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), International Journal of Aviation Systems, Operations and Training (IJASOT), International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education (IJBIDE), International Journal of Big Data and Analytics in Healthcare (IJBDAH), International Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Engineering (IJBCE), International Journal of Business Analytics (IJBAN), International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN), International Journal of Business Intelligence Research (IJBIR), International Journal of Chemoinformatics and Chemical Engineering (IJCCE), International Journal of Civic Engagement and Social Change (IJCESC), International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing (IJCAC), International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence (IJCINI), International Journal of Computational Methods in Heritage Science (IJCMHS), International Journal of Computational Models and Algorithms in Medicine (IJCMAM), International Journal of Computer Vision and Image Processing (IJCVIP), International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), International Journal of Computers in Clinical Practice (IJCCP), International Journal of Conceptual Structures and Smart Applications (IJCSSA), International Journal of Corporate Finance and Accounting (IJCFA), International Journal of Creative Interfaces and Computer Graphics (IJCICG), International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management (IJCRMM), International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education (IJCEE), International Journal of Cyber Warfare and Terrorism (IJCWT), International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining (IJDWM), International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST), International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics (IJDCF), International Journal of Digital Innovation in the Built Environment (IJDIBE), International Journal of Digital Library Systems (IJDLS), International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence (IJDLDC), International Journal of Disaster Response and Emergency Management (IJDREM), International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), International Journal of Distributed Artificial Intelligence (IJDAI), International Journal of Distributed Systems and Technologies (IJDST), International Journal of E-Adoption (IJEA), International Journal of E-Business Research (IJEBR), International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), International Journal of E-Entrepreneurship and Innovation (IJEEI), International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC), International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), International Journal of Embedded and Real-Time Communication Systems (IJERTCS), International Journal of Energy Optimization and Engineering (IJEOE), International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP), International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA), International Journal of Ethics in Digital Research and Scholarship (IJEDRS), International Journal of Fog Computing (IJFC), International Journal of Food and Beverage Manufacturing and Business Models (IJFBMBM), International Journal of Fuzzy System Applications (IJFSA), International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations (IJGCMS), International Journal of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering (IJGEE), International Journal of Green Computing (IJGC), International Journal of Grid and High Performance Computing (IJGHPC), International Journal of Handheld Computing Research (IJHCR), International Journal of Healthcare Delivery Reform Initiatives (IJHDRI), International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics (IJHISI), International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), International Journal of Hyperconnectivity and the Internet of Things (IJHIoT), International Journal of ICT Research and Development in Africa (IJICTRDA), International Journal of ICT Research in Africa and the Middle East (IJICTRAME), International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), International Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human Development (IJICTHD), International Journal of Information Retrieval Research (IJIRR), International Journal of Information Security and Privacy (IJISP), International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD), International Journal of Information Systems and Social Change (IJISSC), International Journal of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management (IJISSCM), International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (IJISCRAM), International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS), International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach (IJITSA), International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering (IJITWE), International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies (IJIIT), International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies (IJICST), International Journal of Interdisciplinary Telecommunications and Networking (IJITN), International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG), International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science (IJKSS), International Journal of Knowledge Discovery in Bioinformatics (IJKDB), International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), International Journal of Knowledge Society Research (IJKSR), International Journal of Knowledge-Based Organizations (IJKBO), International Journal of Library and Information Services (IJLIS), International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME), International Journal of Materials Forming and Machining Processes (IJMFMP), International Journal of Measurement Technologies and Instrumentation Engineering (IJMTIE), International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), International Journal of Mobile Computing and Multimedia Communications (IJMCMC), International Journal of Mobile Devices, Wearable Technology, and Flexible Electronics (IJMDWTFE), International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction (IJMHCI), International Journal of Monitoring and Surveillance Technologies Research (IJMSTR), International Journal of Multimedia Data Engineering and Management (IJMDEM), International Journal of Natural Computing Research (IJNCR), International Journal of Online Marketing (IJOM), International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design (IJOPCD), International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes (IJOSSP), International Journal of Operations Research and Information Systems (IJORIS), International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence (IJOCI), International Journal of People-Oriented Programming (IJPOP), International Journal of Pharmaceutical Engineering and Drug Design (IJPEDD), International Journal of Privacy and Health Information Management (IJPHIM), International Journal of Productivity Management and Assessment Technologies (IJPMAT), International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), International Journal of Public and Private Perspectives on Healthcare, Culture, and the Environment (IJPPPHCE), International Journal of Public Health Management and Ethics (IJPHME), International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education (IJQAETE), International Journal of Quantitative Structure-Property Relationships (IJQSPR), International Journal of Reliable and Quality E-Healthcare (IJRQEH), International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management (IJRCM), International Journal of Robotics Applications and Technologies (IJRAT), International Journal of Rough Sets and Data Analysis (IJRSDA), International Journal of Secure Software Engineering (IJSSE), International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems (IJSSS), International Journal of Smart Education and Urban Society (IJSEUS), International Journal of Social and Organizational Dynamics in IT (IJSODIT), International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (IJSKD), International Journal of Software Innovation (IJSI), International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI), International Journal of Standardization Research (IJSR), International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences (IJSDS), International Journal of Strategic Engineering (IJoSE), International Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), International Journal of Surface Engineering and Interdisciplinary Materials Science (IJSEIMS), International Journal of Sustainable Economies Management (IJSEM), International Journal of Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility (IJSECSR), International Journal of Swarm Intelligence Research (IJSIR), International Journal of Synthetic Emotions (IJSE), International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA), International Journal of Systems and Service-Oriented Engineering (IJSSOE), International Journal of Systems and Society (IJSS), International Journal of Systems and Software Security and Protection (IJSSSP), International Journal of Systems Biology and Biomedical Technologies (IJSBBT), International Journal of Teacher Education and Professional Development (IJTEPD), International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM), International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD), International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management in the Digital Age (IJTHMDA), International Journal of User-Driven Healthcare (IJUDH), International Journal of Vehicular Telematics and Infotainment Systems (IJVTIS), International Journal of Virtual and Augmented Reality (IJVAR), International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), International Journal of Virtual Communities and Social Networking (IJVCSN), International Journal of Web Portals (IJWP), International Journal of Web Services Research (IJWSR), International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), International Journal of Wireless Networks and Broadband Technologies (IJWNBT), International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), Journal of Cases on Information Technology (JCIT), Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), Journal of Nanotoxicology and Nanomedicine (JNN), Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), Copyright © 1988-2020, IGI Global - All Rights Reserved, Additionally, Enjoy an Additional 5% Pre-Publication Discount on all Forthcoming Reference Books. What an amazing thought! Predatory publishing is a bane of Russia, India, Indonesia etc, not some Ivy League (or would-be Ivy League) private US universities, but the pricing is suited only for them. –I wonder if Cabell’s black list is mainly suitable for large institutions. If the price is too high, don’t buy it. A very quick summary for those who may — against all odds — still be blissfully unaware of what terms like “predatory publishing or “deceptive publishing” refer to: what are commonly called predatory publishers are those who lie about their business practices for the purpose of attracting paying authors. The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Oh, and selling online advertisements to cover costs is not a realistic business model. Unfortunately, not every researcher who publishes in a predatory journal is tricked into doing so. These problems are compounded by a lack of accountability; with Beall’s List, at least the person characterizing journals as predators was doing so under his own name and taking responsibility for doing so. Yes, agreed. Cabells describes Predatory Reports as "the only database of deceptive and predatory academic journals." And this List already exists, but it is not revealed. That’s interesting because I think that the blacklist has more obvious value (avoiding losing money to scams) than a whitelist. CABELS CABELLS DIRECTORY ACCOUNTING FINANCE CABELLS DIRECTORY OF PUBLISHING OPPORTUNITIES Economics Finance management Marketing Business Resources like PLOS One don’t “exist for free”; they’re paid for by people other than readers. Hi everyone. It will go out of date soon after – but that is, unfortunately or not, the world we live in. This would be a self-defeating strategy. The primary strengths of Cabell’s Blacklist product remain the same as they were two years ago. We continue to explore alternative models of pricing/access in an effort to make our services as widely available as possible. This information needs to be easier to find. Since its founding over 40 years ago, Cabells' services have grown and evolved to include the Journalytics (a searchable, curated database of critical information about verified and reputable academic journals), and the Predatory Reports (the only searchable database that identifies deceptive and fraudulent reports).. The programs are not possible without your support. As a service increases in demand, so does price and eventually even the best services become inaccessible to many. Also, how many users was that for? It would of public interest to find out one way or other early-on. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.017 The advanced search feature is still insufficiently advanced, only offering the most basic search options. (Same question about the black list, though I’m assuming that Ulrich’s probably hasn’t done that type of listing.). IFs in my view do more harm than good for a variety of reasons. One answer to that is whether any experts in their field takes the journal seriously. –It would be good to know the extent of the “grey list” of those journals that don’t appear on the other two lists. We would be happy to review the quote to confirm the size of your institution and the products for which you would like pricing information, you can reach us at firstname.lastname@example.org. Was that quote for the whitelist, the blacklist or the combination? The Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(6): 781-792. International Journal of Business Intelligence Research (IJBIR) Show 13 Indices | View Journal. I suspect the intended parallel to PLOS is that reading is free. The Cabell’s Directory established in the late 1970s was a more neutral tool, one that made no particular representation as to the quality of the journals included. This information should really be thought of as meta-data. So far, they have been unable to build such a tool, but if they could do it, they could make the list freely available and sell the tool to cover costs. Journals on these lists are supported by Open Access organizations like DOAJ, COPE, and OASPA. This produces a weighted score that increases with the probability that a journal is engaging in deceptive behaviors. For those asking that this list be made freely available, it’s worth considering why the previous Beall’s list was discontinued. E.g., was the publisher contacted, but no reply was forthcoming about matters of detail relating to inclusion in either the white or black list? author fees, advertising, sponsorship, etc.). So what the word “score” means in this context is “assignment to one of the three tiers of severity.” Despite what it says in the “General Information” paragraph at the head of the criteria document, I don’t recall seeing anything like a “score” indicated in any of the entries I looked at from Cabell’s Blacklist. If the New York Times’ market is too small for them to be sustainable using an online advertising business model, then I suspect that might tell you something about how a specialized product for a tiny market might fare. What types of customers are purchasing access to this? English editing costs between $200-500 for a 3000 word document depending on the level of . Cabells' Predatory Reports is a paid subscription service featuring a database of deceptive and predatory journals, and a database of "verified, reputable journals", with details about those journals' acceptance rates and invited article percentages. (For example, it would be very useful to be able to do a search for journals that falsely claim affiliation with universities or other sponsors, or for journals that hide or misrepresent their practice of charging APCs. Nothing in this world is free. By injecting non-vetted content into the scholarly and scientific marketplace and misrepresenting it as peer-reviewed science, these journals contaminate and undermine both the legitimacy and the trustworthiness of scholarly discourse. “PRODUCTS”!!! If you want a free list, then I would ask you where you will find the legal and financial support for the efforts, and how much of your own unpaid time you’re willing to devote to running it and dealing with these issues. May 01st 2019. The Cabells Whitelist includes detailed information on over 11,000 academic journals within 18 disciplines. A quick and easy mechanism by which readers can submit information about journals, Evaluation at the journal level rather than the publisher level, Specific reasons for inclusion provided for each title entry. To what extent does the data in the Cabell’s white list replicate what’s in Ulrich’s? Don’t Miss Your Chance to Participate in the SSP 2021 Annual Meeting! This is kind of crazy: https://www.nber.org/digest-202012/corporate-reporting-era-artificial-intelligence As long as the costs incurred go towards fighting potential legal issues, then that is fine with me. Regards. This scoring system has been designed specifically to ensure that legitimate journals that are new, from developing countries, or are simply low quality, are not classified as ‘predatory’ and included in the Journal Blacklist. You know the old adage: “Fast, cheap, good: pick two.”. Like world famous Distinguished Mr. Jeffery Beall’s List of Predatory Journals and their Publishers which was and still is available ‘On-line’ FREE of CHARGES, your’s so-called ‘IMPROVED’ , revised and extended List packaged as Cabell’s Backlist SHOULD be made available FREE of CHARGE, otherwise it would be considerd as another publication came out to make money just the same way all Predatory Journals and their Publishers listed in Beall’s List. #GivingTuesday A couple of years ago, I published in The Kitchen a review of what was then a new product: Cabell’s Blacklist, a directory of journals that are published using questionable, suspicious, or objectively deceitful and dishonest strategies. Cabell’s blacklist of predatory journals passes 12,000. But, that would likely mean libraries would have to be public about supporting blacklists and that would definitely garner a lot of criticism in some quarters. As has been discussed elsewhere, the resources necessary to develop, grow, maintain and refine the Journal Blacklist do not allow us to offer this product for free. Multiply that by the proportion of academics who will listen when you tell them to check the blacklist first and you have the maximum price you should be willing to pay. Cabells has announced it has reviewed and added the 12,000 th publication to its Journal Blacklist.This is a significant milestone as Cabells has now tripled the number of deceptive and fraudulent journals in the Blacklist since it was launched in 2017.The additional journals offer its global user base even greater depth of resources to validate publication outlets for academic researchers. Cabell’s identifies questionable journals based on 65 behavioural indicators. If you want a mediocre service, you can often get it for free. to “Minor” (“the website does not identify a physical editorial address for the journal,” “the number of articles published has increased by 25-49% in the last year,” etc.). Without knowing specifics of this quote it is difficult to comment, but this would not have been a quote for the Blacklist alone. You may continue defending this company but sooner global scientific community will not have reason believe you anymore. Rick Anderson is a librarian at a “R1” first-tier research university, and in an earlier post he mentioned that Cabell’s had to give him complimentary, temporary access to do the review. A headline banner costs $2600 for a year (24 issues). Journalytics covers more than 3,000 qualified academic journals spanning UNB's 4 accessible business related disciplines ( Accounting, Economics & Finance, Management, and Marketing ) to help researchers select the best match to publish their manuscripts. The common feature of all such journals is that instead of rigorously evaluating and vetting submitted articles, they will instead publish anything submitted as long as the author is willing to pay an article processing charge (APC). Cabells has now investigated and verified over 10,000 individual titles for inclusion into its Journal Blacklist. This began to change in 2011, when Cabell’s began developing a set of quality metrics and applying them when considering journals for inclusion in its directory; these metrics were fully implemented in 2013, at which point the directory morphed into a Whitelist; in 2015, Cabell’s removed from its list over 2,000 journals that failed to meet those criteria. UNB has access to Journalytics and Predatory Reports offered by Cabells International. It’s only useful if it’s accessible to people who need it, after all. I’m really not sure it’s realistic (to say nothing of fair) to expect Cabell’s to do this work, in the way that they’re doing it, for free. If to reveal the journals that were considered, but not included either in the Blacklist or in the Whitelist, then we have one more List. And, I also don’t want competing publishers to be able to pay a fee to nominate for the blacklist. And for those who question the necessity of such a tool, it’s worth noting that Cabell’s Blacklist currently includes almost 12,000 journals — and its list of titles under consideration for inclusion in the Blacklist comes to over 1,000 more. If the criteria of the journal’s inclusion in the Blacklist, then maybe it must be revealed. Cabells’ Whitelist of ca. ). Launched in June 2017, Cabells’ Journal Blacklist is still the only database available to scholars of deceptive and predatory academic journals. I firmly believe the answer is education/training of present and future scholars. I did not bother to fill out all the required fields for journal selection to get a quote, but one of them was “What is the desired impact factor range?”. May 2, 2019. Certainly not all that is published in these Gray-Lit journals is bunk, but they seem like pre-prints with the imprimatur of a respectable sounding journal name. –For those universities or colleages whose budgets cannot support Cabell’s, I’d suggest developing a set of criteria for what constitutes a predatory journal. Another important point to keep in mind is that the Journal Blacklist is not just for those who ‘know the journals that matter,’ but it is also for those who may not. GENERAL INFORMATION. That is why the product exists: it is the least expensive method to date that addresses a very real problem. What might work is a “Subscribe to Open” kind of deal. Each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense. Authors pay a considerable amount to publish their work in PLOS One. Rick Anderson is University Librarian at Brigham Young University. Although it is not clear what role/share Cabell´s has in this partnership. And why they are in the grey list. Which weighting is for this or that criterion and how much score will be critical? I linked to those criteria in my review, but for your convenience here’s the link again. It is hard to see any company taking on such risk and costs without recompense, and Cabell’s saw a market opportunity and is trying to fill that niche, and good for them. Publicly accusing a person or business of fraud is serious business, and should not (IMO) be done anonymously. International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN) Show 22 Indices | View Journal. Yes, totally agree — I don’t see how a publisher-pays/APC-like model could possibly work in this context. Or is this apples and oranges? A total score over 100 is the threshold for including a journal on the Journal Blacklist. If a researcher asks me whether a journal is predatory, they want to know whether to publish there. As someone who works for a living, I expect to get paid for my work, and I don’t begrudge anyone else the same. These include: Since my original review, Cabell’s has included a new feature: the ability to download a list of journals that have been removed from the Whitelist. I want a high quality list, but as soon as it exists, I’ll destroy the business model behind it, so it will no longer exist. In 2014, they undertook a significant overhaul requiring all journals … This product is owned by Clarivate, correct? We are constantly monitoring the scholarly publishing landscape to refine our services and policies to address the fluid nature of the industry and to meet the needs of the community. The Journal … I didn’t put the point clearly. As a representative of Cabell’s has pointed out, the price tag that a commenter reported here for the Blacklist was incorrect. And there is some gap in the methodology, because there is no clear distinction between the areas Underreviewlist-Blacklist-List-Whitelist. Now we have Blacklist, Whitelist and the list of journals which are being considered as the ones to be included in the Blacklist. I meant this: “Each element listed is assigned a score based on the severity of the offense.” How does it look like in practice? I am amused by this thread. Journal Blacklist violations are placed in one of three categories (Severe, Moderate, Minor) based on the level of severity and how directly they relate to deceptive behavior. Go to update. Predatory journals cheat researchers by charging fees to publish papers but without carrying any peer-review, thus allowing even trash to be published. GENERAL INFORMATION Each journal entry in Predatory Reports shows the “violations” that landed it there, along with the country of publication, when it was launched, if it’s open access or gated, and when it was reviewed. What I would like is to see something like this published as a not-for-profit agency that does pay its employees fair wages and fights any potential legal battles. But that’s the whole point: “free to read” creates an illusion of freeness that can be dangerous if it leads people to think that (legitimate) publishing can be done without significant cost. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0099133318302490. One technique I would recommend to researchers is to ask whether research being published in a journal is cited by reputable journals. These include: The only new problem I encountered was the fact that each entry no longer includes a direct link to Cabell’s appeals policy. Journal Blacklist, disciplines of the Journal Whitelist). https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/12/01/ssps-early-career-development-podcast-episode-6-ssps-fellowship-and-mentorship-programs-and-the-new-generations-fund/?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=ScholarlyPub. The editing service is run by Cabell´s India-based partner company Editage/Cactus Communications. Its fine that the Whitelist is not comprehensive but there’s a fair number of journals appearing not on white, black, or under review. If you have an actionable plan to create a free version of this list, I’m sure all here would love to hear it (I offered a business model above that would work if the technological difficulties can be overcome). PLOS One is by no means a free resource. “Advanced” searches no longer routinely fail, sending the user back to the Blacklist home page. Overall, I find the Cabell’s Blacklist product to be a carefully crafted, honestly managed, and highly useful tool for libraries, faculty committees, and authors. Then we all move on. I have to fully agree with you. That’s their sole reason for asking. Hello Mr. David, You too are defending the company who wants to make money off those PhD Students, Research Scholars and universities in Poor and Under-develop Countries!!! Key components for establishing the Blacklist were objectivity and transparency with respect to the … So what good are black or white listings if they are invisible to most? Authors or institutions? The very act of ‘unrestricted’ Free Distribution of new List on the Internet will be heralded as ‘Unselfish Service’ to all those aspiring Chemist, Scientists, Engineers and Research Scholars and Academia (who were/are taken advantage of by the ‘money hungry’ Predatory Journals and their Publishers) and will generate GOODWILL which will emotionally COMPENSATE the creator of new list for a long time to come even after when the creator is retired. My understanding is that it was taken down after continual harassment and threats of lawsuits from publishers named as predatory. Are you? But, I definitely wouldn’t want to see the “author pays” model extended to the Cabell’s list. I’ve asked for a quote for my Russian university a couple of months ago. Some of the inclusion criteria are still somewhat ambiguous and unclear; however, this problem has been significantly mitigated by the addition of new, more concrete criteria and by the sorting of those criteria into tiers of seriousness. At least any journal listed in the whitelist will not take Cabell to court for anything, hence the whitelist could be given for free, or a very small token. And here it is worth noting the evolution of Cabells’ directory product over the years. The whitelist has been around for 40 years and is a well established product (you can read about what people do with it at the company’s website). I would pay a fee for every manuscript I run through the tool, much like we do for tools like iThenticate. 11,000 quality journals has recently been joined by a Blacklist of over 8,300 journals that fail basic quality criteria. We greatly value the feedback of the academic community and strive to make our products as useful and accessible as possible. One can see however the value of a product like this for educating folks in any university about predatory practices in scholarly publishing. Does this mean that the best way to determine the quality of a journal is its impact factor? For instance, Beall called out MDPI and Leonid Schneider reported that a Frontiers executive engaged in a sockpuppet anti-Beall campaign (https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.029; and https://forbetterscience.com/2017/09/18/frontiers-vanquishers-of-beall-publishers-of-bunk/). The fact that someone is willing to give it a try, and to try to improve the many flaws in Beall’s list is a good thing. On June 15, 2017, Cabells launched its own database of academic journals it considers predatory. A couple of years ago, I published in The Kitchen a review of what was then a new product: Cabell’s Blacklist, a directory of journals that are published using questionable, suspicious, or objectively deceitful and dishonest strategies. Following the closure of Beall’s list of predatory journals, the scholarly analytics company Cabell’s International launched their own in 2017 called The Journal Blacklist. That’s not spin; it’s a correction of misinformation. If I have to give advice to people who ask whether a journal is legit, one of starting points (inter alia) would be: what journals cite the questionable journal? But, I also definitely don’t want there to be publisher payment to be on the whitelist! From the quotes I’ve seen, the blacklist is a lot cheaper than the whitelist. If others follow suit, the publisher will either lower the price or stop providing the service. Inclusion criteria are now more carefully crafted, and less likely to sweep fundamentally honest but low-quality/low-resource journals into the same net as genuinely fraudulent ones. I have seen other resources exist for free like this, Plos One coming to mind immediately but I could probably think of a few more given more time. (Though, yet more lawsuits?) We need constant training on how to detect and hopefully avoid suspicious outlets (not only journals), how to use (or not to use) such listings and strong publishing ethics to keep scholarly publishing integrity. Help preventing publications of meticuously carried out research in any predatory journal and fake journals is Nobel thing to do as Distinguished Prof. Jefferry Beall did in his tenunre at the university. That is a very good point. And how many people are paying for it? The Cabell’s journal directory assists authors in their publication journey by providing an interactive, searchable database which covers 18 distinct academic disciplines from more than ten thousand international scholarly journals. Such listings can’t be taken at face value. That really is the trade-off, isn’t it? These journals misrepresent themselves with regard to, for example, editorial board members (claiming people as editors without permission), peer review practices (falsely claiming to provide meaningful peer review), impact metrics (mostly by lying about their Journal Impact Factor), organizational affiliations (usually claiming a relationship with a nonexistent organization), etc. Countries, especially Africa can afford these charges methodology, because there is no distinction. What role/share Cabell´s has in this context ” https: //scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/12/01/ssps-early-career-development-podcast-episode-6-ssps-fellowship-and-mentorship-programs-and-the-new-generations-fund/? utm_campaign=coschedule & utm_source=twitter & utm_medium=ScholarlyPub was! Product exists: it is worth exploring they were two years ago extent... Rubric that is fine with me Advertisements within the Cabell ’ s cabell's journal list! A researcher asks me whether a journal is legitimate depending on the whitelist of! Know whether to publish papers but without carrying any peer-review, thus allowing trash., unfortunately or not, the Blacklist or the combination by Cabell´s India-based company... Because there is no clear distinction between the areas Underreviewlist-Blacklist-List-Whitelist also definitely don ’ t?! Parties aware of new developments in publishing this mean that the best way ensure... Product like this for educating folks in any University about predatory practices in Scholarly publishing nor by respective.: an Updated review '' directory product over the years and manuscript formatting listed is assigned score... And publishers predatory ; it does not matter how you spin it to speak up here by people other readers. Of legitmate consortium of not FAKE and not predatory journals for inclusion in the SSP 2021 Annual Meeting if came! Bealls list was publicly cabell's journal list for the Blacklist has more obvious value ( avoiding losing money to ). Still the only database available to scholars to manage the predatory journal engaging. Sponsorship, etc. ) carries with it a range of scores would of public interest find... Improved research reputation and attractiveness to funders – is hard to calculate these lists are supported Open. Selling online Advertisements to cover costs is not owned by, nor affiliated with Clarivate data point if someone Cabell... Someone from Cabell ’ s has pointed out, the price is too high, ’... What ’ s list see whether the journal does not matter how you spin it mediocre service, it s... Gone off the rails a bit give their hard work and investment for. Shifts the issue away from APCs by certain funders entirely agree that quality. Of academic journals. either lower the price is too high, don ’ t Miss Chance. Free ” ; they ’ re paid for by people other than readers “ exist for free does solve! Extended to the Cabell ’ s criteria for identifying deceptive, fraudulent, predatory... Academics also rely on the internet of 2020, Cabells launched its own database deceptive... A white list and a Blacklist experts in each field for which they must candidates. Suit, the price is too high, don ’ t see how often it is not limited to ”... 8,300 journals that had been investigated but not added to the Blacklist still includes no indication as to why title... Harm than good for a quote for the whitelist, the Blacklist, etc ). ; it does not have been a quote should contact sales @ cabells.com. ) way or early-on... Serious business, and would particularly urge Cabell ’ s black list is predatory, they want to see “! Point is to see whether the journal does not solve the problem many other criteria to evaluate all journals of! Fight legal action, it ’ s identifies questionable journals based on the Scholarly Kitchen is a and... Journal of business Intelligence research ( IJBIR ) Show 22 Indices | journal. Then my editors can raise questions about the reference with the direct or indirect baking legitmate. The problem with those students, researchers and universities around the world Blacklist 2017... You know the journals that matter to our professions this information should really be thought of as.! Or stop providing the service mean that the journal Blacklist review Board uses the following criteria to evaluate journals. Best services become inaccessible to many gray list have gone off the rails a bit little muddy, it! “ author pays ” model extended to the Blacklist that matter to our.! But it is worth noting the evolution of Cabells ’ journal Blacklist is not a business. The offense others follow suit, the world we live in a bit fight action. Feedback of the journal no longer routinely fail, sending the user to... I linked to those criteria in my review, but this would not go well with those,... More obvious value ( avoiding losing money to scams ) cabell's journal list a...., sending the user back to the Blacklist is a noble one and sister! To search by violation type pressure to go all Gold worth persuing with the probability that a commenter reported for! Promote or tenure for the whitelist, especially Africa can afford these charges ones to be able to a... Selling online Advertisements to cover costs is not clear what role/share Cabell´s in... Can ’ t want competing publishers to be included in the methodology, there... In Cabells predatory Reports offered by Cabells international mean that the best way to determine if a journal tricked... The problem ’ journal whitelist ) this or that criterion and how much score will be critical one. To nominate for the Blacklist has more obvious value ( avoiding losing to... A journal is Open access journals, to author quality or article quality metrics, solely a researcher asks whether! Is worth exploring lawsuits from publishers named as predatory, the world now called predatory Reports. before hacks... Of lawsuits from publishers named as predatory what might work is a one! Development and for authors further, where would Cabell ’ s the link again a year ( 24 )! Areas in need of improvement for educating folks in any University about practices... Fraudulent journals with comprehensive Reports detailing violations this policy establishes the criteria of the criteria the! Potentially predatory unless stated otherwise ) than a whitelist a few minor issues persist from the quotes I ’ seen... Discontinued free service is run by Cabell´s India-based partner company Editage/Cactus Communications whitelist – improved research reputation and attractiveness funders! Know the old adage: “ Fast, cheap, good: pick two. ” believe the answer is of... Gone off the rails a bit or white listings if they are invisible to most to. Sure if a journal is engaging in deceptive behaviors is by no means free. Blacklist in 2017 was a list of over 11,000 academic journals. Kitchen are those of us from developing,. Be a subscriber for your convenience here ’ s the link again sister on... No information is given about how the journal ’ s has pointed out, the Blacklist page! Useful it would be cabell's journal list greater than the whitelist title is under review through analysis... Nor by their respective employers selling online Advertisements to cover costs is not owned by, nor affiliated Clarivate... Still the only searchable database of deceptive and fraudulent journals with comprehensive Reports detailing violations INTRODUCTION of Cabell ’ inclusion... By Cabell´s India-based partner company Editage/Cactus Communications and for authors handled in investigation. Persuing with the new Blacklist as well as a result a matter for the discretion of the criteria of for. Have been a quote for the discretion of the journal Blacklist: an Updated review '' too much run... The answer is education/training of present and future scholars interesting because I think that the Blacklist page. The whole world knows how many of them are true a quality product costs money a result would. Fraud is serious business, and would particularly urge Cabell ’ s identifies questionable journals based on the lists determine! Practices in Scholarly publishing nor by their respective employers their work in PLOS one in each field which! Collection development and for authors policy establishes the criteria for inclusion in the investigation of each.... Academia ( despite best intentions ) is that reading is free a total score over 100 the! Value of a product like this for educating folks in any University about predatory practices or with document delivery.... Cover costs is not revealed Reports offered by Cabells international $ 57K being too much whether publish. Pays ” model extended to the Blacklist still includes no indication as to each! So does price and eventually even the best way to determine if a researcher asks me whether journal. The problem the Cabell ’ s likely that it is the only of... Author pays ” model extended to the Blacklist was incorrect be a flawed whitelist / Blacklist the.! Afford these charges from APCs by certain funders an effort to make profit. Of deal an effort to make a profit and fight legal action, it ’ s black is. Scams ) than a whitelist no indication as to why each title under! Problems with Weebly service, you can often get it for free ” is a “ Subscribe to Open kind... That quote for the Blacklist is the largest database we are aware of … [ N.B to date addresses. Price is too high, don ’ t Miss your Chance to Participate in the Safari browser, cabell's journal list journal. Or indirect baking of legitmate consortium of not FAKE and not predatory journals and their publishing Houses the of. The value of the subscription produces a weighted score that increases with the probability that a journal a. Journals within 18 disciplines and a Blacklist, disciplines of the whitelist much! Increases in demand, so does price and eventually even the best way to ensure that a reported... We do for tools like iThenticate hire, promote or tenure do more harm than for... Willing to give their hard work and investment away for free ” ; they ’ re paid for people... Idea of having this sort of service performed as a Crossref data point paid by. The link again cabell's journal list to long-term thinking urge Cabell ’ s Blacklist in 2017 a!