Predatory publishing

The COPE predatory publishing discussion document introduces issues, and analyses potential solutions, around predatory publications. COPE welcomes comments which add to this ongoing debate.

Common features of the phenomenon include deception and lack of quality controls, and there are a range of warning signs to look for when assessing a journal. Problems for authors, readers, and other stakeholders are also discussed, as well as an examination of established interventions and solutions to address the problem. COPE presents 30 insightful suggestions to tackle, avoid, and raise awareness of the problem of predatory journals.

Key points

• Many warning signs of predatory journals are the opposite of the Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing.

• Negative effects of predatory publishing include deceiving authors into paying for non-existent services, wasting funding, and diluting the research with unreliable papers.

• Solutions to the problem of fake journals may include community education or criminal charges.

• Guidance, training, and safe lists should be updated regularly as new journals frequently emerge. 

• Predatory publishers often use the author publication charge business model.

Related resources

• Identifying fake journals COPE Officers' statement, April 2023
• Avoiding predatory publishers Guest editorial, February 2022
• Predatory publishing: next steps and where do we go from here? COPE Forum discussion, December 2020

Your feedback

COPE welcomes feedback from publishers, journal editors, reviewers, researchers, institutions, librarians, funders, and other stakeholders on this subject. Add your feedback below.