Helping Researchers Navigate Journal Quality and Publishing Integrity

Predatory publishing is no longer a fringe issue; it is now embedded in the global research ecosystem, evolving alongside increasing publication pressure and more sophisticated deception tactics [1]. Predatory journals continue to pose a serious challenge across scholarly publishing.

These publications often present themselves as legitimate academic journals, but their primary goal is financial gain rather than the advancement of scholarship. They may exploit researchers’ pressure to publish by promising rapid review, easy acceptance, or broad visibility while providing little or no meaningful peer review, editorial oversight, indexing, or long-term discoverability [1, 5].

For authors, especially early-career researchers, the risks can be significant: wasted publication fees, reduced credibility, loss of control over the work, poor discoverability, and difficulty publishing the same research elsewhere. For the broader research ecosystem, predatory publishing can weaken trust, facilitate the spread of misinformation, and make it harder for legitimate journals and publishers to maintain quality standards [2].

At Accdon, we view journal selection and publication readiness as essential parts of responsible scholarly communication. Tools such as LetPub’s Journal Selector and community platforms such as Peeref can help researchers evaluate journals more carefully, learn from peer experiences, and avoid questionable publishing venues [1].

What are predatory journals?

Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship. They often use misleading information, poor editorial practices, limited transparency, and aggressive solicitation to attract submissions [1, 5].

In practice, these journals may look legitimate at first glance. They may claim to be peer-reviewed, list editorial boards, advertise metrics, and invite researchers to submit manuscripts. But behind the appearance of legitimacy, they may provide little or no real peer review, publish almost anything for a fee, or misrepresent their indexing, editorial standards, and publication timelines [1, 4].

Why avoiding predatory journals matters

Publishing in a predatory journal can create long-term problems for researchers and institutions.

It may:

• damage a researcher’s reputation;

• reduce the visibility and discoverability of the work;

• prevent the manuscript from being considered by a reputable journal later;

• expose the author to unnecessary fees;

• create copyright or takedown problems;

• contribute to the circulation of poorly reviewed or misleading research [2].

The issue is not only individual author harm. Predatory journals also affect the integrity of the scholarly record. When articles are published without proper peer review, quality control, or editorial accountability, misinformation can spread more easily and public trust in research can be weakened [1].

AI-generated content and peer review: an emerging risk

The rise of generative AI is adding a new layer of complexity to journal evaluation. Recent reporting has highlighted concerns that AI-generated text is appearing not only in manuscript submissions, but also in peer-review activity, with some journals observing increased submission volumes and signs of declining content quality alongside potential AI-assisted reviews [3].

For legitimate journals, AI tools may have appropriate uses when governed by clear policies, transparency, and editorial oversight. In predatory or low-quality publishing environments, however, AI-generated reviews may make weak or nonexistent peer review appear more credible than it is. Researchers should therefore look not only for a stated peer-review process, but for evidence that the process is meaningful, transparent, and accountable.

Red flags to watch for

Researchers should be cautious when a journal shows one or more of the following signs:

Unrealistic publication timelinesBe wary of promises of peer review and publication in only a few days. Legitimate peer review takes time.

Unclear or superficial peer reviewA journal may claim to be peer-reviewed but provide little detail about the process or deliver review quality that does not match its claims [1, 4].

AI-generated or formulaic peer reviewBe cautious if peer-review reports appear unusually generic, overly brief, or disconnected from the manuscript’s actual content. In questionable journals, AI-generated review language may be used to create the appearance of rigor without meaningful evaluation.

Fake or unverifiable metricsSome journals advertise incorrect impact factors or use metrics that cannot be verified through recognized sources [1, 4].

Poor website quality or inconsistent informationGrammar errors, broken links, unclear policies, or inconsistent contact details can indicate weak oversight.

Aggressive email invitationsRepeated unsolicited invitations to submit manuscripts or join editorial boards should be treated carefully [1, 5].

Unclear article processing chargesFees should be clearly stated before submission [1].

Questionable editorial boardsResearchers should verify whether editors are real, active scholars with appropriate affiliations [1].

Copyright or takedown concernsSome predatory journals require authors to transfer copyright or ignore takedown requests [1, 2].

How researchers can check journal credibility

Before submitting to an unfamiliar journal, authors should take time to verify its credibility.

Useful steps include:

• reviewing the journal website carefully;

• confirming the peer review process is clearly explained;

• checking whether fees are transparent;

• verifying indexing in recognized databases;

• confirming editorial board affiliations;

• checking inclusion in DOAJ or OASPA;

• consulting librarians or mentors;

• reviewing community feedback [4].

Structured journal evaluation tools, such as LetPub’s Journal Selector, allow researchers to compare journals systematically across review timelines, indexing status, and community feedback, reducing reliance on surface-level indicators [1].

What if you have already published in a predatory journal?

Researchers should not panic, but they should act carefully.

Possible next steps include:

• reviewing any copyright agreement;

• limiting visibility of the publication if necessary;

• seeking advice from a supervisor or librarian;

• exploring withdrawal or retraction options;

• learning from the experience [2].

The broader publishing challenge

Predatory publishing reflects broader pressures in research: the need to publish quickly, uneven access to mentorship, and the complexity of evaluating journals across disciplines and regions [1].

Addressing the problem requires more than individual vigilance. Authors, institutions, publishers, and service providers all play a role in improving transparency and publication readiness.

For Accdon, this is part of a broader commitment to helping researchers make informed journal-selection decisions, evaluate journal quality more confidently, and engage with legitimate publishing venues through a healthier scholarly communication ecosystem.

References

[1] Peeref. “Predatory Journals: How to Spot and Avoid Them.”

[2] American Psychological Association. “Predatory publishers.”

[3] Drake, J. “AI slop is flooding academic journals.” Forbes.

[4] George Washington University Himmelfarb Library. “Predatory publishing guide.”

[5] University of Alabama Libraries. “Predatory publishing.”