The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why do authors publish in predatory journals?
Abstract
This study examines the reasons why authors publish in ‘predatory’OA journals. In total, 50 journals were randomly selected from Beall's list of ‘predatory’ journals. Different methods, including WHOIS tracking, were utilized to query basic information about the selected journals, including location and registrant. Then, 300 articles were randomly selected from within selected journals in various scientific fields. Authors of the selected articles were contacted and sent survey questions to complete. A grounded theory qualitative methods approach was used for data collection and analysis. The results demonstrated that most of these journals were located in the developing world, usually Asia or Africa, even when they claimed they were in the USA or UK. Furthermore, four themes emerged after authors’ survey responses were coded, categorized, and sub‐categorized. The themes were:social identity threat, unawareness, high pressure,and lack of research proficiency. Scholars in the developing world felt that reputable Western journals might be prejudiced against them and sometimes felt more comfortable publishing in journals from the developing world. Other scholars were unaware of the reputation of the journals in which they published and would not have selected them had they known. However, some scholars said they would still have published in the same journals if their institution recognised them. The pressure to ‘publish or perish’ was another factor influencing many scholars’ decisions to publish in these fast‐turnaround journals. In some cases, researchers did not have adequate guidance and felt they lacked the knowledge of research to submit to a more reputable journal. More needs to be done by institutions and reputable journals to make researchers aware of the problem of ‘predatory’ journals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Matching findings by Kurt [12] regarding predatory journal authors, many appear to be based in a developing world country and at least one seemed unaware of the journal’s nature.”
From False authorship: an explorative case study around an AI-generated article published under my name (2025) · cites this paper as [12]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bohannon, J. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.60 · Cited by 934
Sherman, D. K., Hartson, K. A., Binning, K. R., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Garcia, J., Taborsky-Barba, S., Tomassetti, S., Nussbaum, A. D., & Cohen, G. L. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031495 · Cited by 371
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- 10.1177/0141076814548526 · DOI
- 10.1038/489179a · DOI · Paper page
- Beall J., 2013, The open‐access movement is not really about open access, tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 11, 589, 10.31269/triplec.v11i2.525 · DOI
- Beel J., 2009, Academic Search Engine Optimization (aseo) optimizing scholarly literature for Google Scholar & Co, Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41, 176
- 10.5860/crln.76.3.9277 · DOI
- Branscombe N. R., 1999, Social identity; Context, Commitment, Content, 35
- 10.1136/bmj.h210 · DOI
- Google. (n.d.). About Google Scholar. Retrieved fromhttp://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/about.html
- 10.1002/bies.201500011 · DOI
- Jalalian M., 2014, Hijacked journals and predatory publishers: Is there a need to re‐think how to assess the quality of academic research?, Walailak Journal of Science & Technology, 11, 389
- Kolata G., 2013, Scientific articles accepted (personal checks, too), New York Times, 2013, 28
- 10.1087/20140405 · DOI
- 10.1111/jan.12589 · DOI
- Shaw C.(2013 4 October). Hundreds of open access journals accept fake science paper [Web log post]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2013/oct/04/open-access-journals-fake-paper · DOI
- 10.1007/978-94-009-6669-7_17 · DOI
- Strauss A., 1998, Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques
- Truth F., 2012, Pay big to publish fast: Academic journal rackets, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 10, 54
- Ware M. &Mabe M.(2015).The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. The Hague The Netherlands: International Association of Scientific Technical and Medical Publishers. Retrieved fromhttp://www.stm-assoc.org/2015_02_20_STM_Report_2015.pdf
- 10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_44 · DOI
- 10.1002/asi.23265 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Predatory Journals: Who Publishes in Them and Why?
Demir, S. B. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008 · Cited by 245
Green, T. (2019) · Learned Publishing · doi:10.1002/leap.1219 · Cited by 78
Challenges posed by hijacked journals in Scopus
Abalkina, A. (2024) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.24855 · Cited by 47
Detecting a network of hijacked journals by its archive
Abalkina, A. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04056-0 · Cited by 45
False authorship: an explorative case study around an AI-generated article published under my name
Spinellis, D. (2025) · Research Integrity and Peer Review · doi:10.1186/s41073-025-00165-z · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Kurt, S.
- Venue
- Learned Publishing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-01-18
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 141-147
- ISSN
- 0953-1513
- 1741-4857
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why do authors publish in predatory journals? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/leap.1150
- The paper
- Kurt, S. (2018). Why do authors publish in predatory journals? Learned Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1150