April 20, 2021

New Preprint: “Who Reviews for Predatory Journals? A Study on Reviewer Characteristics”

The research article (preprint) linked to below was posted on bioRxiv earlier today.

Title

Who Reviews for Predatory Journals? A Study on Reviewer Characteristics

Authors

Anna Severin
Swiss National Science Foundation
University of Bern

Michaela Strinzel
Swiss National Science Foundation

Matthias Egger
University of Bern
Swiss National Science Foundation

Marc Domingo
Publons

Tiago F. Barros
Publons

Source

via bioRxiv
March 11, 2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.03.09.983155

Abstract

Background

While the characteristics of scholars who publish in predatory journals are relatively well-understood, nothing is known about the scholars who review for these journals. We aimed to answer the following questions: Can we observe patterns of reviewer characteristics for scholars who review for predatory journals and for legitimate journals? Second, how are reviews for potentially predatory journals distributed geographically?

Methods

We matched random samples of 1,000 predatory journals and 1,000 legitimate journals of the Cabells Scholarly Analytics journal lists with the Publons database of review reports, using the Jaro-Winkler string metric. For reviewers of matched reviews, we descriptively analysed meta-data on reviewing and publishing behaviour.

Results

We matched 183,743 unique Publons reviews that were claimed by 19,598 reviewers. 6,077 reviews were conducted for 1160 unique predatory journals (3.31% of all reviews). 177,666 were claimed for 6,403 legitimate journals (96.69% of all reviews). The vast majority of scholars either never or only occasionally submitted reviews for predatory journals to Publons (89.96% and 7.55% of all reviewers, respectively). Smaller numbers of scholars claimed reviews predominantly or exclusively for predatory journals (0.26% and 0.35% of all reviewers, respectively). The two latter groups of scholars are of younger academic age and have fewer publications and fewer reviews than the first two groups of scholars. Developing regions feature larger shares of reviews for predatory reviews than developed regions.

Conclusion

The characteristics of scholars who review for potentially predatory journals resemble those of authors who publish their work in these outlets. In order to combat potentially predatory journals, stakeholders will need to adopt a holistic approach that takes into account the entire research workflow.

Direct to Full Text Article (Preprint)
14 pages; PDF.

About Gary Price

Gary Price (gprice@mediasourceinc.com) is a librarian, writer, consultant, and frequent conference speaker based in the Washington D.C. metro area. Before launching INFOdocket, Price and Shirl Kennedy were the founders and senior editors at ResourceShelf and DocuTicker for 10 years. From 2006-2009 he was Director of Online Information Services at Ask.com, and is currently a contributing editor at Search Engine Land.

Share