Taekho You , Jinseo Park , June Young Lee , Jinhyuk Yun
{"title":"可疑出版的区域概况","authors":"Taekho You , Jinseo Park , June Young Lee , Jinhyuk Yun","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Countries and authors in the academic periphery have occasionally been criticized for contributing to the expansion of questionable publishing, because they share a major fraction of papers in questionable journals. On the other side, both quantitative evaluation systems and social stratification in academic publishing drive authors toward questionable journals rather than legitimate publications. Questionable journals are sometimes perceived as serving local academia, a function considered essential for regional scientific development in certain countries. However, this requires rigorous examination. In this study, we performed an in-depth analysis of the distribution of questionable publications and journals along with their interplay with countries, quantifying the influence of questionable publications on academic inequality. We found that low-impact journals play a vital role in the regional academic environment, whereas questionable journals with equivalent impacts publish papers globally, both geographically and academically. The business model of questionable journals differs from that of regional journals, and may thus be detrimental to the broader academic community.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101670"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regional profile of questionable publishing\",\"authors\":\"Taekho You , Jinseo Park , June Young Lee , Jinhyuk Yun\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Countries and authors in the academic periphery have occasionally been criticized for contributing to the expansion of questionable publishing, because they share a major fraction of papers in questionable journals. On the other side, both quantitative evaluation systems and social stratification in academic publishing drive authors toward questionable journals rather than legitimate publications. Questionable journals are sometimes perceived as serving local academia, a function considered essential for regional scientific development in certain countries. However, this requires rigorous examination. In this study, we performed an in-depth analysis of the distribution of questionable publications and journals along with their interplay with countries, quantifying the influence of questionable publications on academic inequality. We found that low-impact journals play a vital role in the regional academic environment, whereas questionable journals with equivalent impacts publish papers globally, both geographically and academically. The business model of questionable journals differs from that of regional journals, and may thus be detrimental to the broader academic community.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Informetrics\",\"volume\":\"19 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101670\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Informetrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725000343\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Informetrics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725000343","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Countries and authors in the academic periphery have occasionally been criticized for contributing to the expansion of questionable publishing, because they share a major fraction of papers in questionable journals. On the other side, both quantitative evaluation systems and social stratification in academic publishing drive authors toward questionable journals rather than legitimate publications. Questionable journals are sometimes perceived as serving local academia, a function considered essential for regional scientific development in certain countries. However, this requires rigorous examination. In this study, we performed an in-depth analysis of the distribution of questionable publications and journals along with their interplay with countries, quantifying the influence of questionable publications on academic inequality. We found that low-impact journals play a vital role in the regional academic environment, whereas questionable journals with equivalent impacts publish papers globally, both geographically and academically. The business model of questionable journals differs from that of regional journals, and may thus be detrimental to the broader academic community.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Informetrics (JOI) publishes rigorous high-quality research on quantitative aspects of information science. The main focus of the journal is on topics in bibliometrics, scientometrics, webometrics, patentometrics, altmetrics and research evaluation. Contributions studying informetric problems using methods from other quantitative fields, such as mathematics, statistics, computer science, economics and econometrics, and network science, are especially encouraged. JOI publishes both theoretical and empirical work. In general, case studies, for instance a bibliometric analysis focusing on a specific research field or a specific country, are not considered suitable for publication in JOI, unless they contain innovative methodological elements.