This post by Rick Anderson, and the comments that follow, is an excellent introduction to the conversation about the quality of open access journals in general and the editorial policies of the Directory of Open Access Journals. The comments include a conversation joined by important voices like Peter Suber, Richard Poynder, and Jeffrey Beall (of Beall’s list).
Originally posted on The Scholarly Kitchen:
Last week, Nature News & Commentran a piece with the headline “Open-access website gets tough.” In it, author Richard Van Noorden reported that the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is cleaning house: deleting all entries from its list and “asking all of the journals in its directory to reapply on the basis of stricter criteria.” This development seems clearly to come as the result of growing concern about “predatory” journals—publications that present themselves to potential authors as rigorous and high-quality scholarly open access (OA) journals but actually do little more than collect processing fees up front and then publish whatever is submitted, often without any peer review or even meaningful editorial oversight. Because there is great worldwide demand for the opportunity to place articles in peer-reviewed journals, and because setting up a fake “journal” is both cheap and relatively simple, the appearance and growth of such…
View original 980 more words