Sharing research results with the world is key to the progress of your discipline and career, but with so many publications, how can you be sure you can trust a particular journal?
Follow one of these checklists created by THINK CHECK SUBMIT to make sure you choose trusted journals and publishers for your research.
Books & Chapters: A checklist tool designed to help assess a book or chapter's readiness for publication.
Journals: A checklist tool designed to assess a journal's readiness for publication.
“‘Predatory’ Online Journals Lure Scholars Who Are Eager to Publish” by Michael Stratford, Chronicle of Higher Education, March 4, 2012. (Requires UT institutional credentials to access).
"Predatory Publishing": The COPE predatory publishing discussion document introduces issues, and analyses potential solutions, around predatory publications. Common features of the phenomenon include deception and lack of quality controls, and there are a range of warning signs to look for when assessing a journal. COPE presents 30 insightful suggestions to tackle, avoid, and raise awareness of the problem of predatory journals.
"AI and Fake Papers": Marie Soulière and Sarah Marie Eaton introduce a YouTube discussion held at the COPE Forum on the implications of artificial intelligence on authorship, bias, and originality, as well as the benefits of AI in counteracting fraud.
Researchers in academia write scholarly journals for their peers. These journals focus on a specific academic field and aim to advance knowledge within that discipline by publishing in-depth research studies. However, changing publishing models, particularly the rise of open-access journals, have reshaped how scholars share and access journal articles. Notably, most scholarly journals undergo peer review. When searching the SPH library online catalog and databases, you can filter your results to include only scholarly journals and/or peer-reviewed journals. While no single resource comprehensively evaluates all journals, here are some factors to consider when assessing journal quality.
The Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association suggests that when reviewing an open-access publisher or journal for quality and legitimacy, the following should be considered:
Peer review process
All of a journal’s content, apart from any editorial material marked as such, shall be subjected to peer review. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers and experts in the field who are not part of the journal’s editorial staff. This process and any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures shall be clearly described on the journal’s website.
Governing bodies
Journals shall have editorial boards or other governing bodies whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors shall be provided on the journal’s website.
Editorial team/contact information
Journals shall provide the full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors on the journal’s website as well as contact information for the editorial office.
Author fees
Any fees or charges that are required for manuscript processing and/or publishing materials in the journal shall be clearly stated in a place that is easy for potential authors to find before submitting their manuscripts for review or explained to authors before they begin preparing their manuscript for submission.
Copyright
Copyright and licensing information shall be clearly described on the journal’s website, and licensing terms shall be indicated on all published articles, both HTML and PDFs.
Identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct
Publishers and editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow it to occur. Suppose a journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal. In that case, the publisher or editor shall follow COPE’s guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.
Ownership and management
Information about the ownership and/or management of a journal shall be indicated on the journal’s website. Publishers shall not use organizational names that would mislead potential authors and editors about the nature of the journal’s owner.
Website
A journal’s website, including the text that it contains, shall demonstrate that care has been taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards.
Name of journal
The Journal name shall be unique and not be one that is easily confused with another journal or that might mislead potential authors and readers about the Journal’s origin or association with other journals.
Conflicts of interest
A journal shall have clear policies on handling potential conflicts of interest of editors, authors, and reviewers and the policies should be clearly stated.
Accessibility
The way(s) the journal and individual articles are available to readers and whether there are associated subscription or pay-per-view fees shall be stated.
Revenue sources
Business models or revenue sources (i.e. author fees, subscriptions, advertising, reprints, institutional support, and organizational support) shall be clearly stated or otherwise evident on the journal’s website.
Indexing
Journals shall be indexed by major indexing and abstracting services. It indicates the quality and shows discoverability.
Publishing schedule
The periodicity at which a journal publishes shall be indicated.
Archiving
A journal’s plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the journal content (for example, access to main articles via CLOCKSS or PubMedCentral) in the event a journal is no longer published shall be indicated.
Direct marketing
Any direct marketing activities, including solicitation of manuscripts that are conducted on behalf of the journal, shall be appropriate, well-targeted, and unobtrusive.