Abstract
Abstract:
Predatory journals are widely acknowledged as a significant problem in scholarly publishing and, more broadly, as a threat to the responsible conduct of research. Because predatory publishers base their operations on deception, it is possible for well-intentioned researchers to unwittingly end up publishing their work in predatory journals. Of a more problematic nature is the behaviour of researchers who intentionally publish in predatory journals as a way of bypassing legitimate peer review. In such cases it is important to decide how such behaviour should be classified, as a way of developing policy aimed at deterrence. The aim of this study was to answer the question as to whether intentional publishing in predatory journals can be considered a form of scientific misconduct, based on the critical application of four conditions taken as being requirements for this. It is not currently possible to satisfy all four conditions that would include intentional publishing in predatory journals as a form of scientific misconduct. However, there are grounds to argue that this behaviour satisfies the definition of a questionable research practice. Regardless of exactly where intentional publishing in predatory journals is placed in the spectrum of unethical research behaviours, there is an urgent need for coherent institutional policy to effectively deal with it and, more broadly, with naive publishing in predatory journals.