by ecancer reporter Audrey Nailor

Many of us are familiar with the frustration of academic spam: marketing emails from purported open-access journals hoping for the privilege of publishing your exciting new research... at a significant cost to yourself.

Usually, it's easy to separate the wheat from the chaff - suspect sales pitches are often riddled with spelling and grammar errors, demonstrate poor understanding of one's research, and arrive very quickly at a clear demand for cash.

But what about more sophisticated pitches that sound quite convincing? What should you look for on a new journal's website?

And, with dire warnings of "predatory journals" dominating open-access discussions, how does one determine whether an open-access journal is a wolf in sheep's clothing - or a plucky underdog with admirable goals?

A reasonable response is to drop the name of the journal or publisher into a search engine, and see whether you pull up anything unsavoury attached to it.

Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado, is the curator of Beall's List - a Wordpress blog with a log of publishers and journals whose behaviours and practices he has identified as predatory – but while it's an important resource, one simply can’t rely on Mr Beall to identify and investigate every journal that one might be curious about.

In an article in Learned Publishing, publisher Tom Hill of Libertas Academica Ltd provides a more portable toolkit - some useful criteria for identifying legitimate open-access journals.

“I hope what authors and readers take from my article is that it’s possible to quickly and easily evaluate new potential publishing opportunities," Mr Hill told ecancer in an interview.

First, Hill suggests in the article that the unfamiliar publisher should clearly offer certain “customer services,” demonstrating an investment in both authors and readers, and a commitment to serving both that goes beyond the simple accumulation of fees.

Some evaluation questions may include:

• Does the publisher offer notifications for new articles?
• Are there article citation export functions?
• Does the publisher use Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs)?
• Is the publisher affiliated with a curated article archive, such as PubMed Central?

The last question is its own consideration, as databases such as PubMed have rigorous inclusion standards.

However, newer publications may not have met these standards yet, which may not reflect on their quality.

Even if the publication appears to be established and customer-oriented – is it ethical?

Considerations to keep in mind include:

• Is it part of an ethical body, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)?
• Is it a member of an industry body that requires ethical compliance, such as the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)?
• Is there a policy on declaration of competing interests?

Of course, a journal that promises acceptance of your article has no intention of performing rigorous peer review.

Guaranteed outcome is not a function of any legitimate peer review process, and publications that offer such should be viewed with caution.

A final consideration is the big question in open-access publication – how much is this going to cost, and who will pay for it?

This information should be clear and accessible. Questions to consider include:

• Does the publication clearly state its fees, or, if there are no fees, is that clear and obvious?
• Are fee discounts and waivers available? To whom? Are the criteria for qualification clear?
• Does the publication use a Creative Commons license?
• Do readers have to sign up to view content?

The immediate benefit of Mr Hill’s criteria is obvious – one needn’t be a publishing professional to use them. A simple browse around a publication’s website should resolve most queries – and if it doesn’t, that can be an answer in itself.

Mr Hill suggests keeping an open mind, especially with respect to emerging publications.

“I’d like to emphasise the importance of not jumping to the conclusion that because a journal is new or innovative that it is somehow questionable,” he explains. “New journals can offer significant benefits to authors and readers.”

What should open-access publishers take away from his article?

“For publishers, I think the message is simple,” Mr Hill concludes. “Treat authors and readers with the respect they deserve.”

Reference

Hill, T. Identifying legitimate open access journals: some suggestions from a publisher. (2015) Learned Publishing. 28