Beall's List of Questionable Journals: Difference between revisions

From bradwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " <html> <p>Last updated JANUARY 2017</p> <p><b><span style="text-decoration:underline;">Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals</span></b></...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1,266: Line 1,266:


</html>
</html>
[[Category:Methods‏‎]]
[[Category:Neurobiology]]
[[Category:Neuroscience Methods‏]]
[[Category:Science]]

Latest revision as of 12:49, 16 January 2017

<html>

Last updated JANUARY 2017

Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals

This is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access standalone journals. For journals published by a publisher, please look for the publisher on the list of publishers. This list is only for single, standalone journals.

We recommend that scholars read the available reviews, assessments and descriptions provided here, and then decide for themselves whether they want to submit articles, serve as editors or on editorial boards.  In a few cases, non-open access journals whose practices match those of predatory journals have been added to the list.

We hope that tenure and promotion committees can also decide for themselves how importantly or not to rate articles published in these journals in the context of their own institutional standards and/or geo-cultural locus.  We emphasize that journals change in their business and editorial practices over time. This list is kept up-to-date to the best extent possible but may not reflect sudden, unreported, or unknown enhancements

</html>

Retrieved from "https://bradleymonk.com/wiki/index.php?title=Beall%27s_List_of_Questionable_Journals&oldid=3229"