In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 18, No. 7 ( 2023-7-7), p. e0287547-
Abstract:
Beall’s list is widely used to identify potentially predatory journals. With this study, we aim to investigate the impact of Beall’s list on the perception of listed journals as well as on the publication and citation behavior of the scientific community. We performed comprehensive bibliometric analyses of data extracted from the ISSN database, PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Crossref, Scopus and Web of Science. Citation analysis was performed by data extracted from the Crossref Cited-by database. At the time of analysis, Beall’s list consisted of 1,289 standalone journals and 1,162 publishers, which corresponds to 21,735 individual journals. Of these, 3,206 (38.8%) were located in the United States, 2,484 in India (30.0%), and 585 in United Kingdom (7.1%). The majority of journals were listed in the ISSN database (n = 8,266), Crossref (n = 5,155), PubMed (n = 1,139), Scopus (n = 570), DOAJ (n = 224), PMC (n = 135) or Web of Science (n = 50). The number of articles published by journals on Beall’s list as well as on the DOAJ continuously increased from 2011 to 2017. In 2018, the number of articles published by journals on Beall’s list decreased. Journals on Beall’s list were more often cited when listed in Web of Science (CI 95% 5.5 to 21.5; OR = 10.7) and PMC (CI 95% 6.3 to 14.1; OR = 9.4). It seems that the importance of Beall’s list for the scientific community is overestimated. In contrast, journals are more likely to be selected for publication or citation when indexed by commonly used and renowned databases. Thus, the providers of these databases must be aware of their impact and verify that good publication practice standards are being applied by the journals listed.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.g008
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.s007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0287547.r008
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2023
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Permalink