A big responsibility for an academic library is to advise researchers and authors on which academic journals can be trusted with their work. We know the pressures of publishing for metrics and impact. We also know the questionable and sometimes outright predatory publishing practices that seem to promise quick publication and high impact factors when in fact there is little to no peer-review. It is very difficult for an author to 'lose' their work to such practices.
Open Access publishing provided yet another opportunity for these types of publishers (should some of them be even called publishers?) to make more money. Now they can posit that the loss of subscription fees allow them to charge article processing charges to make up for a loss. Libraries around the world are working tirelessly to make agreements with these publishers and pointing out that libraries pay enormous subscription fees, so let our authors publish without charges. Or at least, please, give them a discount. In South Africa, SANLiC negotiates for these agreements.
With budget cuts in higher education and its effect on individual institutions and researchers, it is now even more difficult for researchers to pay exorbitant publication fees. They have to be very sure of the academic journal's reputation before they spend sometimes over R60 000 to publish one article. So, to get back to the academic library's responsibility: they have to be able to cut through all the different open access models and questionable practices to be able to advise authors on where to publish.
There are products that make it easier to find journals that are flagged as questionable or predatory, for example, Fidelior and Cabell's. Most of the lists indexing accredited journals also make notices available of journals that have been removed, and why. There are still black lists too, like the Beal's list and others. At the UFS Library and Information Services we prefer to focus on the lists of accredited journals where strict criteria are applied to select and include academic journals. Black lists can be useful, but should be used with caution and never without verifying the reasons for flagging a particular journal title.
Even with titles included in accredited lists double checking the reputation of a journal is never a bad idea. And looking at the inclusion criteria for these lists help me as a librarian understand why a journal can be viewed as reputable. And why, when certain titles or publishers are questioned, it can help an author make a decision about where to publish. In the end it is probably not a good idea to blindly follow either inclusion or black lists, and always best to connect with your research office to see if they have excluded certain titles or publishers even if they are on an accredited list. But you can be sure that your academic library will dig deep to make sure you publish in a reputable title.
0 Comments.