IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i10d10.1007_s11192-021-04118-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers

Author

Listed:
  • Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

    (Independent Researcher)

  • Daniel J. Dunleavy

    (Florida State University)

  • Mina Moradzadeh

    (Iran University of Medical Sciences
    Kerman University of Medical Sciences)

  • Joshua Eykens

    (University of Antwerp)

Abstract

The predatory nature of a journal is in constant debate because it depends on multiple factors, which keep evolving. The classification of a journal as being predatory, or not, is no longer exclusively associated with its open access status, by inclusion or exclusion on perceived reputable academic indexes and/or on whitelists or blacklists. Inclusion in the latter may itself be determined by a host of criteria, may be riddled with type I errors (e.g., erroneous inclusion of a truly predatory journal in a whitelist) and/or type II errors (e.g., erroneous exclusion of a truly valid scholarly journal in a whitelist). While extreme cases of predatory publishing behavior may be clear cut, with true predatory journals displaying ample predatory properties, journals in non-binary grey zones of predatory criteria are difficult to classify. They may have some legitimate properties, but also some illegitimate ones. In such cases, it might be too extreme to refer to such entities as “predatory”. Simply referring to them as “potentially predatory” or “borderline predatory” also does little justice to discern a predatory entity from an unscholarly, low-quality, unprofessional, or exploitative one. Faced with the limitations caused by this gradient of predatory dimensionality, this paper introduces a novel credit-like rating system, based in part on well-known financial credit ratings companies used to assess investment risk and creditworthiness, to assess journal or publisher quality. Cognizant of the weaknesses and criticisms of these rating systems, we suggest their use as a new way to view the scholarly nature of a journal or publisher. When used as a tool to supplement, replace, or reinforce current sets of criteria used for whitelists and blacklists, this system may provide a fresh perspective to gain a better understanding of predatory publishing behavior. Our tool does not propose to offer a definitive solution to this problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Daniel J. Dunleavy & Mina Moradzadeh & Joshua Eykens, 2021. "A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8589-8616, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04118-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04118-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-04118-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-04118-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agnes Grudniewicz & David Moher & Kelly D. Cobey & Gregory L. Bryson & Samantha Cukier & Kristiann Allen & Clare Ardern & Lesley Balcom & Tiago Barros & Monica Berger & Jairo Buitrago Ciro & Lucia Cug, 2019. "Predatory journals: no definition, no defence," Nature, Nature, vol. 576(7786), pages 210-212, December.
    2. Josephson, Jens & Shapiro, Joel, 2020. "Credit ratings and structured finance," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Panagiotis Asimakopoulos & Stylianos Asimakopoulos & Aichen Zhang, 2021. "Dividend smoothing and credit rating changes," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1-2), pages 62-85, January.
    4. Panagiotis Tsigaris & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2019. "Did the Research Faculty at a Small Canadian Business School Publish in “Predatory” Venues? This Depends on the Publishing Blacklist," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-12, May.
    5. Yilmaz Bayar, 2014. "Recent Financial Crises and Regulations on the Credit Rating Agencies," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 5(1), pages 49-58, March.
    6. Bisbee, James H. & Hollyer, James R. & Rosendorff, B. Peter & Vreeland, James Raymond, 2019. "The Millennium Development Goals and Education: Accountability and Substitution in Global Assessment," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 73(3), pages 547-578, July.
    7. David Moher & Larissa Shamseer & Kelly D. Cobey & Manoj M. Lalu & James Galipeau & Marc T. Avey & Nadera Ahmadzai & Mostafa Alabousi & Pauline Barbeau & Andrew Beck & Raymond Daniel & Robert Frank & M, 2017. "Stop this waste of people, animals and money," Nature, Nature, vol. 549(7670), pages 23-25, September.
    8. Hasan, Zubair, 2017. "Academic sociology: The alarming rise in predatory publishing and its consequences for Islamic economics and finance," MPRA Paper 87853, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Sep 2018.
    9. Paul Wouters & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière & Marie E. McVeigh & Bernd Pulverer & Sarah de Rijcke & Ludo Waltman, 2019. "Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal," Nature, Nature, vol. 569(7758), pages 621-623, May.
    10. Eric Helleiner & Hongying Wang, 2018. "Limits to the BRICS’ challenge: credit rating reform and institutional innovation in global finance," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(5), pages 573-595, September.
    11. Daniël Lakens, 2020. "Pandemic researchers — recruit your own best critics," Nature, Nature, vol. 581(7807), pages 121-121, May.
    12. Hasan, Zubair, 2018. "Alarming rise in predatory publishing and its consequences for Islamic economics and finance education," MPRA Paper 86146, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Oct 2018.
    13. Meredith T Niles & Lesley A Schimanski & Erin C McKiernan & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2020. "Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    14. Panagiotis Tsigaris & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2020. "Reproducibility issues with correlating Beall-listed publications and research awards at a small Canadian business school," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 143-157, April.
    15. Lawrence J. White, 2010. "Markets: The Credit Rating Agencies," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 211-226, Spring.
    16. Vincent Larivière & Stefanie Haustein & Philippe Mongeon, 2015. "The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    17. repec:eme:jfrcpp:v:23:y:2015:i:4:p:383-402 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Daniel R. Vernazza & Erik F. Nielsen, 2015. "The Damaging Bias of Sovereign Ratings," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 44(2), pages 361-408, July.
    19. António Afonso & Pedro Gomes & Philipp Rother, 2011. "Short‐ and long‐run determinants of sovereign debt credit ratings," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, January.
    20. Tove Faber Frandsen, 2017. "Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1513-1528, December.
    21. Joshua Eykens & Raf Guns & A I M Jakaria Rahman & Tim C E Engels, 2019. "Identifying publications in questionable journals in the context of performance-based research funding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
    22. Kyle Siler, 2020. "Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1386-1401, November.
    23. Vít Macháček & Martin Srholec, 2021. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Predatory publishing in Scopus: evidence on cross-country differences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 1897-1921, March.
    24. Petris Sorina Ioana, 2014. "Credit Rating Agencies And Their Influence On Crisis," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 271-278, December.
    25. Meeh-Bunse, Gunther & Schomaker, Stefan, 2020. "An Analysis of the Competitive Situation on the EU Rating Market in Context of Regulatory Requirements," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2020), Virtual Conference, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Virtual Conference, 10-12 September 2020, pages 147-156, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mina Moradzadeh & Shahram Sedghi & Sirous Panahi, 2023. "Towards a new paradigm for ‘journal quality’ criteria: a scoping review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 279-321, January.
    2. Yuki Yamada & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2022. "A psychological perspective towards understanding the objective and subjective gray zones in predatory publishing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4075-4087, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuki Yamada & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2022. "A psychological perspective towards understanding the objective and subjective gray zones in predatory publishing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4075-4087, December.
    2. Libor Ansorge, 2023. "The right to reject an unwanted citations: do we need it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4147-4150, July.
    3. Emanuel Kulczycki & Marek Hołowiecki & Zehra Taşkın & Franciszek Krawczyk, 2021. "Citation patterns between impact-factor and questionable journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8541-8560, October.
    4. Luitel, Prabesh & Vanpée, Rosanne & De Moor, Lieven, 2016. "Pernicious effects: How the credit rating agencies disadvantage emerging markets," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 286-298.
    5. Polito, Vito & Wickens, Michael, 2015. "Sovereign credit ratings in the European Union: A model-based fiscal analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 220-247.
    6. Ioannou, Stefanos & Wójcik, Dariusz & Pažitka, Vladimír, 2021. "Financial centre bias in sub-sovereign credit ratings," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    7. Polito, Vito & Wickens, Mike, 2014. "Modelling the U.S. sovereign credit rating," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 202-218.
    8. Najko Jahn & Lisa Matthias & Mikael Laakso, 2022. "Toward transparency of hybrid open access through publisher‐provided metadata: An article‐level study of Elsevier," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(1), pages 104-118, January.
    9. Sylvester C.W. Eijffinger, 2012. "Rating Agencies: Role and Influence of Their Sovereign Credit Risk Assessment in the Eurozone," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(6), pages 912-921, November.
    10. Dimity Stephen, 2023. "Medical articles in questionable journals are less impactful than those in non-questionable journals but still extensively cited," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4509-4522, August.
    11. Agnello, Luca & Castro, Vítor & Sousa, Ricardo M., 2021. "On the duration of sovereign ratings cycle phases," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 512-526.
    12. de Haan, Leo & Vermeulen, Robert, 2021. "Sovereign debt ratings and the country composition of cross-border holdings of euro area sovereign debt," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    13. Li Yan & Wang Zhiping, 2023. "Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    14. Slapnik, Ursula & Lončarski, Igor, 2023. "Understanding sovereign credit ratings: Text-based evidence from the credit rating reports," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    15. Siler, Kyle & Larivière, Vincent, 2022. "Who games metrics and rankings? Institutional niches and journal impact factor inflation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    16. Yalta, A. Talha & Yalta, A. Yasemin, 2018. "Are credit rating agencies regionally biased?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 682-694.
    17. Ben Hmiden, Oussama & Tatoutchoup, Didier & Nguimkeu, Pierre & Avelé, Donatien, 2024. "Discrepancy and cross-regional bias in sovereign credit ratings: Analyzing the role of public debt," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    18. De Moor, Lieven & Luitel, Prabesh & Sercu, Piet & Vanpée, Rosanne, 2018. "Subjectivity in sovereign credit ratings," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 366-392.
    19. Salim Moussa, 2021. "Citation contagion: a citation analysis of selected predatory marketing journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 485-506, January.
    20. Cristina Bodea & Raymond Hicks, 2018. "Sovereign credit ratings and central banks: Why do analysts pay attention to institutions?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 340-365, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04118-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.