2015 marked the 350th anniversary of the creation of scientific journals, with the publication of the Journal des Sçavans in France and the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1665 [109].
In 2016, of the approximately 35,000 journals worldwide, about 11,500 were controlled by the ‘top 5 publishers’ (Taylor & Francis Group, Springer Nature, Wiley, Elsevier, and Inderscience), with only 3,261 Scopus indexed (about 9%). Also, note that ‘top 5’ has many definitions and lists [228 - 229].
Malaysia by 2023 is projecting 60,000 Ph.D. students [105]. In Thailand in 2020, there were a reported 25,000 Ph.D. students, up from 1,380 students in 2008 [23]. In the P.R.C., the Ministry of Education (MOE) has announced a goal of 100,000 doctoral students in 2020 [257]. Thus, in Asia, the competition in the search for journals to publish research is fierce!
In Thailand, there are only two SJR or Scopus indexed social science journals. In Vietnam, Indonesia, Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia, there are none.
Scientists at Chinese institutions stand to make a small fortune if a paper they write appears in journals with high citation impacts, with a 1999 – 2016 analysis showing, on average, Chinese universities offer first authors more than $43,000 for publishing a paper in Science or Nature, with the top reward for such a paper reaching $165,000 [139]. In most cases in China, cash incentives are paid to the first author.
Academic publishing is big business and highly profitable [1, 235]. In 2015 the industry was estimated to be worth $25.2 billion globally. Market research also reports that the global anti-plagiarism (similarity) software market is growing at over 18% per year and is expected to reach $822.40 million by 2025. The Turnitin similarity checking software platform enterprise was sold for $1.7 billion in March 2019 [140]. The similarity/plagiarism checking software industry is big business and highly misunderstood!
UK universities paid the world’s top 10 publishers over $1.227 billion between 2010 and 2019 [83], with more than 90% going to five companies. These five publishers were Elsevier, Wiley, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis and Sage.
In a 2019 article about European spending on scientific journals, another group of ‘big five’ publishers were identified as Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, Taylor & Francis and the American Chemical Society (ACS) [142], with overall expenditures within the block of 26 countries equal to €597 million (£515 million) in 2017.
Elsevier, in 2019, had 2,500 academic journals, which brought in $3.414 billion in earnings [141]. In 2019, Elsevier published over 496,000 articles and 49,000 gold open access articles. This total was from a total of 2 million submitted articles. Researchers also read over 1 billion articles that were selected by 22,000 editors. Elsevier’s article output accounts for 18% of global research output, while garnering a 26% share of citations.
Although similarity checking and plagiarism checking are used as synonyms, they are not. Therefore, the Turnitin paper analysis, report’s generation, and how screening editors interpret the reports are highly misunderstood processes. Clarification and understanding of this are critical to your academic publishing success.
Many journals are now using 15% as the Turnitin cutoff score for your paper’s consideration for review. A few years ago, this score was around 30 - 35%. Once again, too many refer to this as a ‘plagiarism score’ which it is not! Therefore, you better make sure your submission has been checked and edited several times before submission.
The concept of ‘self-plagiarism’ is, by definition, an oxymoron, as you cannot plagiarize yourself. The term "self-plagiarism" is therefore nonsensical. However, the phrase is now used daily in the academic and finance communities. Therefore, the author has suggested for many years the core idea needs to be re-labeled, along with the removal of the word ‘plagiarism.’ In the past we have suggested terms such as repetitive publishing, repeat publishing, or dual-use publishing. Others have suggested ‘textual recycling’ [157 - 158], including COPE, which seem to understand the difference and dangers in the use of the ill-used term ‘self-plagiarism’ in discussing these ideas [171].
The Beall Lists were created in 2011 by a US librarian in the state of Colorado by Jeffrey Beall. In January 2017, his lists were removed from his website [252]. However, these lists are still archived on the Internet and are still used by numerous institutions around the world for journals and publishers that are not allowed for academic publication. He has subsequently retired, but his legacy and lists live on [253].
The authors do agree with Mr. Beall that some publishers, journals, and conferences are predatory. However, it is suggested that instead of a ‘black-list,’ there should instead be a ‘white-list’. DOAJ’s list of 14,307 journals has gone a long way in creating an academic approved, Open Access publishing ‘white-list.’
In 2020, the most commonly accepted and recognized indexing databases were Scopus, SJR, and Clarivate Analytics (ISI). Adding to the confusion is a plethora of databases created by the Chinese. Name changes are very frequent within this sector, so don’t get frustrated if you don’t know what someone is talking about.
When journals become part of major academic journal indices, their fees for submission or publication explode, usually from free to many hundreds to thousands of dollars! Once again, academic publishing is big business.
It is common for journals to receive 800 - 2,000 papers per year. Therefore, submission editors now look for any reason to reject your paper. Elsevier has reported that for their 2,500 journals and 2 million yearly submission, their overall acceptance rate is around 30%. However, Nature, Cell, Science, and PLoS Biology have been stated to reject on the order of 90% of their submissions. Authors can realistically expect acceptance rates between 10% - 30% if their paper is technically perfect and has native English speaker editing and proofing.
The actual paper publication process can also take up to two years. If the journal does not issue an acceptance letter or your paper is no published as an Open Access (OA) paper, you might have to wait a very long time (2 years is very common) to schedule your dissertation defense or apply for academic rank. Therefore, time to publish (not acceptance) can be a significant concern and part of the criteria for journal publication selection.
Highly recognized publisher names within the academic community include Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Springer Nature, Sage, Routledge, and Inderscience. However, not all journals under this group of publishers are indexed. Thus, you must be very careful and research each possible journal before submission. Do not assume the journal is indexed just because it is from a well-known publisher!
Numerous postings and articles have discussed the predatory practices of OMICS and WSEAS journals and conferences [251]. Added to the confusion are name changes. Check with your advisors, faculty, and institution when considering anything under these umbrellas. We also noted the removal of nine WSEAS journals from the Scopus index in October 2020 for ‘publication concerns’.
Journals (major indices) touted by many conferences seldom end up publishing the papers from the conference participants. Far too often, conference literature, web sites, and emails seem to say your paper will be/has been accepted for publication. Case in point, OMICS gets 60% of its revenue from 3,000 global conferences. As they say, the devil is in the detail!
As the movement towards open access (OA) to scholarly content gathers momentum, the use of preprints is a central feature. Cornell University’s arXiv, biology’s bioRxiv, the University of Maryland’s SocArXiv, SIPS’ PsyArXiv and Africa’s AfricArXiv has become well-known names. However, be warned there is a large grey area about how these papers are viewed by journals which run similarity reports such as Turnitin when you submit the same paper for review and publication consideration.
Academics who know how and where to publish research are truly the Wizards of their profession. Although this knowledge is highly compartmentalized, we can tell you how and where to find out what you need to know.
The bottom line is
that academic publishing along with similarity/plagiarism checking software
platforms, are joined at the hip and both are big businesses. You, therefore,
need to know the rules and hard realities in playing and winning the game, as
your competition is in the millions and the processes can be debilitating brutal
to the uninformed.
No comments:
Post a Comment