Distinguishing articles in questionable and non-questionable journals using quantitative indicators associated with quality

Abstract

This ongoing study investigates the viability of distinguishing articles in questionable journals (QJs) from those in non-QJs on the basis of quantitative indicators typically associated with quality, and what can be deduced about the quality of articles in QJs based on the differences observed. I contrast the length of abstracts and full-texts, prevalence of spelling errors, text readability, number of references and citations, and other characteristics of 1,714 articles from 31 QJs, 1,691 articles from 16 journals indexed in Web of Science (WoS), and 1,900 articles from 45 non-WoS/non-QJs, all in the field of psychology. Initial results indicate that there are differences between QJs and non-QJ samples, however these are relatively small, perhaps indicating that QJs may not substantially differ from non-QJs on these quantitative indicators of quality. However, I intend to use additional analyses to further explore any potential differences.