Academic Journals Plagued by Bogus Impact Factors

Publishing Research Quarterly

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 183-187

  Dadkhah, Mehdi ^a   Borchardt, Glenn ^b   Lagzian, Mohammad ^a   Bianciardi, Giorgio ^c  

^a FERDOWSI UNIVERSITY OF MASHHAD   (Iran)

^b Progressive Science Institute   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SIENA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bogus impact factors; Impact factor; Indexing bases; Journal metrics; Predatory journal

Indexed keywords

EID: 85019108147     PISSN: 10538801     EISSN: 19364792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12109-017-9509-4     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Beall J. Criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers. Scholarly open access. 2015. https://scholarlyoa.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/criteria-2015. Pdf. Accessed 14 Feb 2015.
2. Beall J. Misleading metrics. 2016. https://scholarlyoa.com/other-pages/misleading-metrics/. Accessed 7 July 2016.
3. Dadkhah M, Bianciardi G. Ranking Predatory Journals: Solve the Problem Instead of Removing It! Adv Pharm Bull. 2016;6(1):1–4.
4. Gutierrez FR, Beall J, Forero DA. Spurious alternative impact factors: the scale of the problem from an academic perspective. BioEssays. 2015;37(5):474–6.
5. Jalalian M, Mahboobi H. New corruption detected: bogus impact factors compiled by fake organizations. Electron Phys. 2013;5(3):6856–86.
6. Jalalian M. The story of fake impact factor companies and how we detected them. Electron Phys. 2015;7(2):1069–72.
7. Memon AR. ResearchGate is no longer reliable: leniency towards ghost journals may decrease its impact on the scientific community. J Pak Med Assoc. 2016;66(12):1643–7.
8. Nolfi DA, Lockhart JS, Myers CR. Predatory publishing: what you don’t know can hurt you. Nurse Educ. 2015;40(5):217–9.