The story so far

An editorial titled ‘Predatory Journals: What Can We Do to Protect Their Prey’ was jointly published across the world’s most prestigious scientific journals in their first issue of January 2025. Unusually, all leading journals such as Nature, Science, The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, NMJI (and many more) spoke in a unified voice, urging the global academic community to recognise and combat the dangers of predatory journals. This editorial was a desperate call to action against a crisis threatening the foundation of scholarly integrity.

What is a peer-reviewed journal?

To understand academia’s current state, one must first grasp the role of periodicals— in science and health. Scientific journals aim to advance knowledge through rigorous scrutiny. Scientific papers undergo peer reviews, ensuring that only credible, well-researched findings are published. This process maintains academic integrity and prioritises scholarly validation, distinguishing journals from other periodicals.

At the heart of academic journals lies the peer-review system, a rigorous process where submitted manuscripts undergo critical evaluation by experts in the field. This system ensures that the research is original and methodologically credible. Over time, this validation process became the gold standard of scientific inquiry, refining and filtering knowledge before it is published. Peer-reviewed journals including Nature (1869) and Science (1880) rose to prominence, becoming prestigious platforms for scholars. For centuries, scientific publishing was driven by intellectual contribution and validation for findings, pushing the boundaries of knowledge.

But then, something changed…

The essence of scientific publishing eroded as academia became increasingly metric-driven in the 20th century. Universities worldwide mandated research publications for faculty hiring, tenure, and promotion. Initially designed to help students make informed choices, university rankings began using publication counts and citations as key indicators. This inadvertently fuelled the “publish or perish” culture, where academic survival depended more on quantity than quality. Professors, like professional athletes, were expected to deliver consistently, leading to immense pressure to publish, sometimes at the cost of integrity.

In sports, an athlete’s worth is measured by statistics—runs, goals, and medals. Similarly, academics became valued based on publication numbers rather than knowledge value added. This reflects Goodhart’s Law: When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. Universities, eager to climb rankings, laid the emphasis on research output.

This excessive pressure in academia gave rise to predatory journals. By mandating research output, universities unknowingly created a demand for fast and easy publication. And where there is demand, opportunists will always be ready to exploit it. Enter predatory journals—entities that mimic legitimate academic publications but operate without any real peer review or editorial oversight.

The revenue model of academic publishing

To sustain and maintain editorial independence, academic publishing mainly follows three revenue models: closed access, open access, and hybrid access. Most periodicals, including newspapers and magazines, operate under a closed or hybrid model (a combination of open and closed models to choose from), where readers or institutions pay for access through subscriptions. Closed-access academic journals follow the same model, ensuring rigorous peer review but limiting access to those who can afford it. Open access shifts the financial burden to authors and researchers through Article Processing Charges, allowing free public access and increasing visibility, readership, and citations. Higher citations improve a researcher’s h-index, strengthening their CV and career prospects. While open access democratises knowledge, making research available to a wider audience, it has drawbacks. Predatory journals exploit this model by charging authors high fees while bypassing rigorous peer review, flooding academia with low-quality research and misinformation.

What are predatory journals?

Predatory journals masquerade as legitimate academic platforms while operating without rigorous editorial standards. These journals promise rapid publication in exchange for hefty processing fees, often targeting young and inexperienced researchers under pressure to publish. Unlike reputable journals, which subject submissions to meticulous peer review, predatory journals accept almost anything, regardless of scientific merit. This unchecked influx of subpar research disrupts the integrity of science and truth.

Identifying predatory journals is crucial to maintaining research integrity. They may list esteemed researchers on their editorial boards without consent or fabricate non-existent scientists to appear legitimate. Predatory publishers aggressively solicit submissions through unsolicited emails while hiding or misleading authors about publication fees. Many falsely claim indexing in reputable databases like Web of Science or Scopus.

For early-career researchers, publishing is a milestone that boosts opportunities and credibility. However, publishing in predatory journals can turn it into a career setback. Hiring committees scrutinise publication records, and association with dubious journals harms academic integrity. Some institutions blacklist them, making retractions rare and tarnishing a researcher’s reputation permanently.

Identifying predatory journals remains a challenge despite resources like Beall’s List and other databases, as these journals constantly appear and disappear, making a comprehensive blacklist infeasible. Researchers must adopt a proactive approach, using platforms like Think. Check. Submit, where the World Association of Medical Editors provides practical guidelines for assessing journal credibility. Researchers must scrutinise email addresses and URLs for inconsistencies. Institutions must also invest in continuous education programmes to help early-career researchers recognise and avoid these deceptive publishing traps.

The erosion of truth

Predatory publishing is more than an academic issue; it distorts scientific discourse, misleads policymakers and medical professionals, and fuels misinformation. During COVID-19, dubious studies promoting unproven treatments appeared in predatory journals, were cited by politicians and media, and eroded public trust in science. Unlike reputable journals that retract flawed research, predatory journals rarely issue corrections, allowing misinformation to persist. This problem extends beyond academia, affecting global health, policy, and the economy. In an era of infodemics, these journals accelerate the spread of false claims on vaccines, climate change, and medicine, weakening public confidence in science

The recent unified editorial highlights this crisis, but combating predatory publishing requires systemic reforms. Universities and ranking bodies must rethink their reliance on publication metrics and shift towards assessing research quality and impact. Researchers, particularly early-career scholars, must be educated about the risks of predatory publishing. Policymakers need to introduce regulatory frameworks to curb the operations of fraudulent journals.