Just to clarify, low publishing costs and impact factors are not a sign of predatory publishers. This was just the one journal I noted in which those two things were really suspicious IN CONTEXT
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Hah! it’s very predatory
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And what is the quality of these articles?
-
If the IF is <1, in a medical journal, the quality may be very poor.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Honestly, that doesn't sound predatory anymore. I'd classify that as opportunistic omnivory!
-
Hm we could send them a version of this twitter conversation and see if it is published?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The two first sentences has nothing to do with being predatory. By that definition
@Meta_Psy or any FAIR oa https://www.fairopenaccess.org is predatory. We have low or no APC and typically no IF. Very disappointed at this tweet. -
Big publishers are pushing to have low APC as indicating predatory journals. This has real consequences of getting non commercial journals black listed. Please don’t spread this myth.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Or very very predatory.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.