Showing 1 - 20 results of 127 for search '"редакционная политика"', query time: 0.72s Refine Results
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
    Conference

    Contributors: Мазур, Л. Н.

    Subject Geographic: RSVPU

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: XVII Всероссийская студенческая научно-практическая конференция «Документ в современном обществе: искусственный интеллект и цифровая трансформация». — Екатеринбург, 2024

  4. 4
    Academic Journal

    Source: Science Editor and Publisher; Vol 10, No 1 (2025); 137-153 ; Научный редактор и издатель; Vol 10, No 1 (2025); 137-153 ; 2541-8122 ; 2542-0267

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/431/296; Кириллова О. В. Об изменениях в государственной научно-публикационной политике, «Белом списке» и перспективах развития российских научных журналов. Научный редактор и издатель. 2024;9(2):124–133. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-24-22; Шорин О. Н. Коммуникационные процессы в научной среде. Научно-техническая информация. Серия 1: Организация и методика информационной работы. 2024;(1):21–29. https://doi.org/10.36535/0548-0019-2024-01-3; Трищенко Н. Д., Макеенко М. И. Влияние открытого доступа на показатели цитируемости и альтернативных метрик статей в ведущих международных научных журналах по медиа и коммуникации. Журнал Сибирского федерального университета. Серия: Гуманитарные науки. 2024;17(8):1602–1611.; Чернова О. А. Влияние открытого доступа на наукометрические показатели российских экономических журналов. Управленец. 2022;13(4):69–82. https://doi.org/10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-4-6; Яночкина Ю. В. Модели открытого доступа российских научных журналов. Управление наукой: теория и практика. 2024;6(2):188–202. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2024.6.2.13; Попова Н. Г., Моисеенко Я. Ю. Открытый доступ: панацея или паллиатив? Проблемы деятельности ученого и научных коллективов. 2023;(9):54–66. https://doi.org/10.24412/2414-9241-2023-9-54-66; Козырев А. Н. Научный журнал как цифровая платформа. Цифровая экономика. 2022;3(19):5–17. https://doi.org/10.34706/DE-2022-03-01; Кузнецова Т. Ю., Сильничая А. В., Евграфова А. О. К вопросу о выборе языковой стратегии издания рейтингового российского журнала. Научный редактор и издатель. 2022;7(1):39–49. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-06; Благинин В. А., Гончарова М. Н., Соколова Е. В. «Вырваться с национального уровня»: наукометрический вектор развития российских журналов в МНБД. Управленец. 2023;14(4):33–57. https://doi.org/10.29141/2218-5003-2023-14-4-3; Комарица В. Н. Использование многокритериальных методов для оценки потенциала цитируемости научных статей. Научно-техническая информация. Серия 1: Организация и методика информационной работы. 2022;(6):29–35. https://doi.org/10.36535/0548-0019-2022-06-4; Гуськов А. Е., Шрайберг Я. Л. Вызовы для развития наукометрических исследований. Научные и технические библиотеки. 2023;(2):37–58. https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2023-2-37-58; Романов С. А., Трофимов Ю. В. Достигнутые результаты и перспективы редакционной политики. Академическая мысль. 2021;(3):68–74.; Сидоренко М. Ю. Взаимодействие формальных и неформальных институций в редакционно-издательском процессе подготовки социогуманитарных научных журналов. Проблемы деятельности ученого и научных коллективов. 2022;(8):239–252. https://doi.org/10.24412/2414-9241-2022-8-239-252; Тургель И. Д. Приоритеты трансформации редакционной политики научного журнала в условиях международных санкций. Научный редактор и издатель. 2022;7(1):28–38. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-03; Мыслякова Ю. Г. Влияние института рецензирования на научную зрелость российских журналов. Научный редактор и издатель. 2022;7(1):50–59. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-33; Демиденко С. Ю. Роль рецензирования в повышении качества научного знания (на примере журнала «Социологические исследования»). Социологические исследования. 2024;(10):80–91. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0132162524100077; Спасенников В. В., Рытов М. Ю., Андросов К. Ю. Экспертная система поддержки принятия решений как средство повышения качества рецензирования статей в научном журнале. Эргодизайн. 2022;(2):128–136. https://doi.org/10.30987/2658-4026-2022-2-128-136; Гуреев В. Н., Мазов Н. А. Роль и значимость рецензирования в отечественной и иностранной научной периодике в информационно-библиотечной области: сравнительный анализ. Научный редактор и издатель. 2021;6(2):93–103. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-21-03; Кириллова О. В., Тихонова Е. В. Критерии качества научного журнала: измерение и значимость. Научный редактор и издатель. 2022;7(1):12–27. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-39; Балацкий Е. В., Екимова Н. А. Рынок российских экономических журналов в условиях международной изоляции. Управленец. 2022;13(4):15–25. https://doi.org/10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-4-2; Лоскутова Т. А. Современные подходы к оценке качества российских научных журналов. Baikal Research Journal. 2017;8(1):16. https://doi.org/10.17150/2411-6262.2017.8(1).16; Ильина И. Е., Бородик К. А. Методический подход к формированию рейтинга научных журналов, входящих в Перечень рецензируемых научных изданий, в которых должны быть опубликованы основные научные результаты диссертаций на соискание ученой степени кандидата наук и доктора наук. Юридическое образование и наука. 2023;(1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.18572/1813-1190-2023-1-5-14; Цветкова В. А., Мохначева Ю. В. Российские научные журналы в структуре оценок исследовательских процессов. Управление наукой: теория и практика. 2023;5(2):77–88. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.2.5; Рубинштейн А. Я. О наукометрических рейтингах и журнальной ВАКханалии. Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2023;27(2):290–305. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8691-2023-27-2-290-305; Мазов Н. А., Гуреев В. Н., Ильичёва И. Ю. Представленность российской университетской научной периодики в международных и отечественных системах научно-технической информации. Вестник Российской академии наук. 2024;94(9):839–852. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869587324090079; Третьякова О. В. Перечень ВАК: Возможности и ограничения для интеграции в систему оценки научных исследований. Вестник Российской академии наук. 2024;94(12):1115–1128. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869587324120056; Pölönen J., Guns R., Kulczycki E., Sivertsen G., Engels T. C. E. National lists of scholarly publication channels: An overview and recommendations for their construction and maintenance. Journal of Data and Information Science. 2021;6(1):50–86. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0004; Третьякова О. В. Национальные списки научных журналов: обзор мировой практики. Журнал институциональных исследований. 2023;15(3):20–39. https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2023.15.3.020-039; Deutz D. B., Drachen T. M., Drongstrup D., Opstrup N., Wien C. Quantitative quality: a study on how performance-based measures may change the publication patterns of Danish researchers. Scientometrics. 2021;126(4):3303–3320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03881-7; Patwardhan B., Nagarkar S., Gadre S. R., Lakhotia S. C., Katoch V. M., Moher D. A critical analysis of the ‘UGC-approved list of journals’. Current Science. 2018;114(6):1299–1303. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v114/i06/1299-1303; Sivertsen G. The Norwegian model in Norway. Journal of Data and Information Science. 2018;3(4):3–19. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2018-0017; Kulczycki E. Assessing publications through a bibliometric indicator: The case of comprehensive evaluation of scientific units in Poland. Research Evaluation. 2017;26(1):41–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvw023; Кочетков Д. М. Белый список российских журналов: вопросы, ждущие ответа. Научный редактор и издатель. 2022;7(2):185–190. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-48; Курдин А. А. Опции оценки научной работы в условиях санкций. Управление наукой: теория и практика. 2022;4(2):169–182. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.2.15; Дьяченко Е. Л., Губа К. С., Потапов И. В., Мироненко А. Ю. Сравнение подходов к стратификации российских журналов: наукометрические индикаторы, международные базы данных и национальные списки. Научно-техническая информация. Серия 1: Организация и методика информационной работы. 2024;(5):13–21. https://doi.org/10.36535/0548-0019-2024-05-3; Мохначева Ю. В. Журнальные списки и рейтинги российских изданий: противоречия и возможные пути их устранения. Управление наукой: теория и практика. 2024;6(2):147–167. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2024.6.2.11; Третьякова О. В. Российский опыт составления национальных списков научных журналов: ошибки, задачи и перспективы. Terra Economicus. 2023;21(3):102–121. https://doi.org/10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-3-102-121; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/431

  5. 5
    Academic Journal

    Contributors: Rivers State University

    Source: Science Editor and Publisher; Vol 10, No 1 (2025); 50-60 ; Научный редактор и издатель; Vol 10, No 1 (2025); 50-60 ; 2541-8122 ; 2542-0267

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/449/299; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/449/300; Goyanes M., Demeter M. How the geographic diversity of editorial boards affects what is published in JCR-Ranked communication journals. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 2020;97(4):1123–1148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020904169; Iheduru-Anderson K., Okoro F. O., Moore S.S. Diversity and inclusion or tokens? A qualitative study of black women academic nurse leaders in the united states. Global Qualitative Nursing Research. 2022;9:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/23333936211073116; Hutchinson D., Das P., Lall M. D., Hill J., Fares S., Khosa F. Emergency medicine journal editorial boards: Analysis of gender, h-index, publications, academic rank, and leadership roles. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2021;22(2):353–359. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.11.49122; Goyanes M., De-Marcos L., Demeter M., Toth T., Jordá B. Editorial board interlocking across the social sciences: Modelling the geographic, gender, and institutional representation within and between six academic fields. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(9):e0273552. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273552; AlShebli B.K., Rahwan T., Woon W.L. The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration. Nature Communications. 2018;9(1):5163. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07634-8; Raman R. Transparency in research: An analysis of ChatGPT usage acknowledgment by authors across disciplines and geographies. Accountability in Research. 2025;32(3):277–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2273377; Martinez-Jimenez R., Hernández-Ortiz M. J., Cabrera Fernández A. I. Gender diversity influence on board effectiveness and business performance. Corporate Governance. 2020;20(2):307–323. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-07-2019-0206; Harris C. A., Banerjee T., Cramer M., Manz S., Ward S. T., Dimick J., Telem D. A. Editorial (spring) board? Gender composition in high-impact general surgery journals over 20 years. Annals of Surgery. 2019;269(3):582588. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002667; Murrar S., Johnson P. A., Carnes M., Lee Y.-G. Research conducted in women was deemed more impactful but less publishable than the same research conducted in men. Journal of Women’s Health. 2021;30(9):1259–1267. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2020.8666; Fox C. W., Meyer J., Aimé E. Double-blind peer review affects reviewer ratings and editor decisions at an ecology journal. Functional Ecology. 2023;37(5):1144–1157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14259; Wang S., Jones G. A. Competing institutional logics of academic personnel system reforms in leading chinese universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 2021;43(1):49–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2020.1747958; Comel N., Marques F. P. J., Prendin Costa L. O., Orso M., Kohls C. Who navigates the ‘elite’ of communication journals? The participation of BRICS universities in top-ranked publications. Online Media and Global Communication. 2023;2(4):497–543. https://doi.org/10.1515/omgc-2023-0052; Amorelli M.-F., García-Sánchez I.-M. Trends in the dynamic evolution of board gender diversity and corporate social responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2021;28(2):537–554. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2079; Arenas-Castro H., Berdejo-Espinola V., Chowdhury S., Rodríguez-Contreras A., James A. R. M., Raja N. B. et al. Academic publishing requires linguistically inclusive policies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2024;291:20232840. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2023.2840; George Mwangi C. A., Latafat S., Hammond S., Kommers S., Thoma H. S., Berger J., Blanco-Ramirez G. Criticality in international higher education research: A critical discourse analysis of higher education journals. Higher Education. 2018;76(6):1091–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0259-9; Elleuch Lahyani F. Corporate board diversity and carbon disclosure: Evidence from France. Accounting Research Journal. 2022;35(6):721–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-12-2021-0350; Laique U., Abdullah F., Rehman I. U., Sergi B. S. Two decades of research on board gender diversity and financial outcomes: Mapping heterogeneity and future research agenda. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2023;30(5):2121–2144. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2510; Dada S., van Daalen K. R., Barrios-Ruiz A., Wu K.-T., Desjardins A., Bryce-Alberti M. et al. Challenging the ‘old boys club’ in academia: Gender and geographic representation in editorial boards of journals publishing in environmental sciences and public health. PLoS Global Public Health. 2022;2(6):e0000541. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000541; Wu D., Lu X., Li J., Li J. Does the institutional diversity of editorial boards increase journal quality? The case economics field. Scientometrics. 2020;124(2):1579–1597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03505-6; Hedding D. W., Breetzke G. ‘Here be dragons!’ The gross under-representation of the global south on editorial boards in geography. Geographical Journal. 2021;187(4):331–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12405; Lin Z., Li N. Global diversity of authors, editors, and journal ownership across subdisciplines of psychology: Current state and policy implications. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2022;18(2):358–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221091831; Petersen J., Hattke F., Vogel R. Editorial governance and journal impact: A study of management and business journals. Scientometrics. 2017;112(3):1593–1614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2434-7; Youk S., Park H. S. Where and what do they publish? Editors’ and editorial board members’ affiliated institutions and the citation counts of their endogenous publications in the field of communication. Scientometrics. 2019;120(3):1237–1260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03169-x; Radu C., Smaili N., Constantinescu A. The impact of the board of directors on corporate social performance: A multivariate approach. Journal of Applied Accounting Research. 2022;23(5):1135–1156. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-05-2021-0141; Jordan K. From social networks to publishing platforms: A review of the history and scholarship of academic social network sites. Frontiers in Digital Humanities. 2019;6:5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00005; Villeda M., McCamey R. Use of social networking sites for recruiting and selecting in the hiring process. International Business Research. 2019;12(3):66–78. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v12n3p66; Lin J. S., Weber K. L., Samora J. B. How does representation of women on editorial boards compare among orthopaedic, general surgery, and internal medicine journals? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2021;479(9):1939–1946. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000001735; Gaston T. E., Ounsworth F., Senders T., Ritchie S., Jones E. Factors affecting journal submission numbers: Impact factor and peer review reputation. Learned Publishing. 2020;33(2):154–162. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1285; Squazzoni F., Bravo G., Farjam M., Marusic A., Mehmani B., Willis M. et al. Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals. Science Advances. 2021;7(2):eabd0299. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd0299; Goyanes M. Editorial boards in communication sciences journals: Plurality or standardization? International Communication Gazette. 2019;82(4):342–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048518825322; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/449

  6. 6
    Academic Journal

    Source: YASHIL IQTISODIYOT VA TARAQQIYOT; Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): RESPUBLIKA KONFERENSIYA (ILMIY-AMALIY ANJUMAN) MAQOLA VA TEZISLAR TO‘PLAMI: “MILLIY IQTISODIYOTNI BARQAROR SAQLASHDA “YASHIL IQTISODIYOT”, “YASHIL MOLIYA”, “YASHIL BUXGALTERIYA” VA ILG‘OR MUHANDISLIK MAKTABLARINI ILMIY-AMALIY INTEGRATSIYALASHTIRISH DOLZARBLIGI” ; YASHIL IQTISODIYOT VA TARAQQIYOT; Том 3 № 1 (2025): «Yashil iqtisodiyot va taraqqiyot» журнали: Мақола ва тезислар тўплами ; YASHIL IQTISODIYOT VA TARAQQIYOT; ##issue.vol## 3 ##issue.no## 1 (2025): «Yashil iqtisodiyot va taraqqiyot» журнали: Мақола ва тезислар тўплами ; YASHIL IQTISODIYOT VA TARAQQIYOT; ##issue.vol## 3 ##issue.no## 1 (2025): «Yashil iqtisodiyot va taraqqiyot» jurnali: Maqola va tezislar to'plami ; 2992-8982 ; 0000-0000

    File Description: application/pdf

  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
    Conference

    Subject Geographic: RSVPU

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: XVI Всероссийская студенческая научно-практическая конференция «Документ в современном обществе: коммуникативные модели и технологии». — Екатеринбург, 2023

  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
  19. 19
    Academic Journal

    Source: Journal of Sociology: Bulletin of Yerevan University; Vol. 14 No. 2 (38) (2023); 81-106 ; Բանբեր Երևանի համալսարանի. Սոցիոլոգիա; Vol. 14 No. 2 (38) (2023); 81-106 ; Вестник Ереванского Университета: Социология; Том 14 № 2 (38) (2023); 81-106 ; 2738-263X ; 2579-2938 ; 10.46991/BYSU:F/2023.14.2

    File Description: application/pdf

  20. 20
    Academic Journal

    Contributors: Автор выражает благодарность Томасу Бивитту (Институт философии и права УрО РАН) за кропотливую работу по редактированию оригинала данной статьи на английском языке. Автор так- же выражает искреннюю благодарность Яну Моисеенко (Институт философии и права УрО РАН) и Ната- лье Поповой (Институт философии и права УрО РАН) за перевод текста с английского на русский язык

    Source: Science Editor and Publisher; Vol 8, No 2 (2023); 110-123 ; Научный редактор и издатель; Vol 8, No 2 (2023); 110-123 ; 2541-8122 ; 2542-0267

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/361/225; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/361/226; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/361/243; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/361/251; Ojala M., Reynolds R., Johnson K.G. Predatory journal challenges and responses. The Serials Librarian. 2020;78:98–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1722894; Strinzel M., Severin A., Milzow K., Egger M. Blacklists and whitelists to tackle predatory publishing: A cross-sectional comparison and thematic analysis. mBio. 2019;10:e00411-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/; mBio.00411-19; erratum: mBio. 2021;12:e03108-20. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.03108-20; corrigendum: mBio. 2022;13:e0130522. https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.01305-22; Beall J. What I learned from predatory publishers. Biochemia Medica. 2017;27:273–278. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.029; Kimotho S. G. The storm around Beall’s List: A review of issues raised by Beall’s critics over his criteria of identifying predatory journals and publishers. African Research Review. 2019;13:1–12. https://doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v13i2.1; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Kendall G. Academia should stop using Beall’s Lists and review their use in previous studies. Central Asian Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ethics. 2023;4:39–47. https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2023.4.1.04; Koerber A., Starkey J. C., Ardon-Dryer K., Cummins R. G., Eko L., Kee K. F. A qualitative content analysis of watchlists vs safelists: How do they address the issue of predatory publishing? The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2020;46:102236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102236; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Moradzadeh M., Adjei K. O. K., Owusu-Ansah C. M., Balehegn M., Faúndez E. I., Janodia M. D., Al-Khatib A. An integrated paradigm shift to deal with “predatory” publishing. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2022;48:102481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102481; Bisaccio M. Cabells’ journal whitelist and blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations. Learned Publishing. 2018;31:243–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1164; Dony C., Raskinet M., Renaville F., Simon S., Thirion P. How reliable and useful is Cabell’s Blacklist? A data-driven analysis. LIBER Quarterly. 2020;30:1–38. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10339; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Moradzadeh M., Yamada Y., Dunleavy D. J., Tsigaris, P. Cabells’ Predatory Reports criteria: Assessment and proposed revisions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2023;49:102659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102659; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Reflections on the disappearance of Dolos list, a now-defunct “predatory” publishing blacklist. Open Information Science. 2022;6:136–142. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2022-0136; Mimouni M., Braun E., Mimouni F. B., Mimouni D., Blumenthal, E. Z. Beall’s list removed: What stands between us and open access predators? American Journal of Medicine. 2017;130:e371–e372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.03.040; Strielkowski W. Predatory publishing: What are the alternatives to Beall’s list? American Journal of Medicine. 2018;131:333–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.10.054; Kendall G. Beall’s legacy in the battle against predatory publishers. Learned Publishing. 2021;34:379–388. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1374; Krawczyk F., Kulczycki E. How is open access accused of being predatory? The impact of Beall’s lists of predatory journals on academic publishing. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2021;47:102271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102271; Coates A. Academic journals’ usernames and the threat of fraudulent accounts on social media. Learned Publishing. 2022;35:140–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1430; Rivera H., Teixeira da Silva J. A. Retractions, fake peer review, and paper mills. Journal of Korean Medical Science. 2021;36:e165. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e165; Pérez-Neri I., Pineda C., Sandoval H. Threats to scholarly research integrity arising from paper mills: a rapid scoping review. Clinical Rheumatology. 2022;41:2241–2248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-022-06198-9; Gallent Torres C. Editorial misconduct: The case of online predatory journals. Heliyon. 2022;8:e08999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08999; Sureda-Negre J., Calvo-Sastre A., Comas-Forgas R. Predatory journals and publishers: Characteristics and impact of academic spam to researchers in educational sciences. Learned Publishing. 2022;35:441–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1450; Gupta B. B., Arachchilage N. A. G., Psannis K. E. Defending against phishing attacks: Taxonomy of methods, current issues and future directions. Telecommunication Systems. 2018;67:247–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-017-0334-z; Dadkhah M., Maliszewski T., Teixeira da Silva J. A. Hijacked journals, hijacked web-sites, journal phishing, misleading metrics and predatory publishing: Actual and potential threats to academic integrity and publishing ethics. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. 2016;12:353–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-016-9785-x; Abalkina A. Detecting a network of hijacked journals by its archive. Scientometrics. 2021;126:7123–7148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04056-0; Trejo-Pech C. O., Thach S. V., Thompson J. M., Manley J. Violations of standard practices by predatory economics journals. Serials Review. 2021;47:80–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2021.1959183; Walters W. H. The citation impact of the Open Access accounting journals that appear on Beall’s List of potentially predatory publishers and journals. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2022;48:102484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102484; Laine C., Winker M. A. Identifying predatory or pseudo-journals. Biochemia Medica. 2017;27:285–291. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.031; Shamseer L., Moher D., Maduekwe O., Turner L., Barbour V., Burch R., Clark J., Galipeau J., Roberts J., Shea B.J. Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: Ccan you tell the difference? A crosssectional comparison. BMC Medicine. 2017;15:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9; Cobey K. D., Lalu M. M., Skidmore B., Ahmadzai N., Grudniewicz A., Moher D. What is a predatory journal? A scoping review. F1000Research. 2018;7:1001. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15256.2; Cobey K. D., Grudniewicz A., Lalu M. M., Rice D. B., Raffoul H., Moher D. Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: A survey. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e026516. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026516; Cukier S., Helal L., Rice D. B., Pupkaite J., Ahmadzai N., Wilson M., Skidmore B., Lalu M. M., Moher D. Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: A systematic review. BMC Medicine. 2020;18:104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01566-1; Cukier S., Lalu M., Bryson G. L., Cobey K. D., Grudniewicz A., Moher D. Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: A modified Delphi consensus process. BMJ Open. 2020;10: e035561. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035561; Leonard M., Stapleton S., Collins P., Selfe T. K., Cataldo T. Ten simple rules for avoiding predatory publishing scams. PLoS Computational Biology. 2021;17:e1009377. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009377; Oermann M. H., Nicoll L. H., Carter-Templeton H., Owens J. K., Wrigley J., Ledbetter L. S., Chinn P. L. How to identify predatory journals in a search: Precautions for nurses. Nursing. 2022;52:41–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NURSE.0000823280.93554.1a; Kendall G., Linacre S. Predatory journals: Revisiting Beall’s research. Publishing Research Quarterly. 2022;38:530–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09888-z; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Dunleavy D. J., Moradzadeh M., Eykens J. A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of journals and publishers. Scientometrics. 2021;126:8589–8616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04118-3; Dunleavy D. J. Progressive and degenerative journals: on the growth and appraisal of knowledge in scholarly publishing. European Journal for Philosophy of Science. 2022;12:61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-022-00492-8; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Junk science, junk journals, and junk publishing management: Risk to science’s credibility. Philosophia. 2023;51:1701–1704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-022-00590-0; Moed H. F., Lopez-Illescas C., Guerrero-Bote V. P., de Moya-Anegon F. Journals in Beall’s list perform as a group less well than other open access journals indexed in Scopus but reveal large differences among publishers. Learned Publishing. 2022;35:130–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1428; Frandsen T. F. Why do researchers decide to publish in questionable journals? A review of the literature. Learned Publishing. 2019;32:57–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1214; Frandsen T. F. Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles. Learned Publishing. 2022;35:598–604. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1489; Mills D., Inoue K. Problematizing ‘predatory publishing’: A systematic review of factors shaping publishing motives, decisions, and experiences. Learned Publishing. 2021;34:89–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1325; Siler K. Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2021;71:1386–1401. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24339; Ng J. Y., Haynes R. B. “Evidence-based checklists” for identifying predatory journals have not been assessed for reliability or validity: An analysis and proposal for moving forward. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2021;138:40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.06.015; Rupp M., Anastasopoulou L., Wintermeyer E., Malhaan D., El Khassawna T., Heiss C. Predatory journals: a major threat in orthopaedic research. International Orthopaedics. 2019;43:509–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4179-1; Manley S. Predatory journals on trial. Allegations, responses, and lessons for scholarly publishing from FTC v. OMICS. Journal of Scholarly Publishing. 2019;50:183–200. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.50.3.02; Siler K., Vincent-Lamarre P., Sugimoto C. R., Larivière V. Predatory publishers’ latest scam: Bootlegged and rebranded papers. Nature. 2021;598:563–565. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02906-8; Grudniewicz A., Moher D., Cobey K. D., Bryson G. L., Cukier S., Allen K., Ardern C., Balcom L., Barros T., Berger M., Ciro J. B., Cugusi L., Donaldson M. R., Egger M., Graham I. D., Hodgkinson M., Khan K. M., Mabizela M., Manca A., Milzow K., Mouton J., Muchenje M., Olijhoek T., Ommaya A., Patwardhan B., Poff D., Proulx L., Rodger M., Severin A., Strinzel M., Sylos-Labini M., Tamblyn R., van Niekerk M., Wicherts J. M., Lalu M. M. Predatory journals: No definition, no defence. Nature. 2019;576:210–212. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Dobránszki J., Tsigaris P., Al-Khatib A. Predatory and exploitative behaviour in academic publishing: an assessment. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2019;45:102071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102071; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Tsigaris P. Issues with criteria to evaluate blacklists: An epidemiological approach. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2020;46:102070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102070; Ndungu M. W. Scholarly journal publishing standards, policies and guidelines. Learned Publishing. 2021;34:612–621. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1410; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Dobránszki J., Al-Khatib A., Tsigaris P. Challenges facing the DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) as a reliable source of open access publishing venues. Journal of Educational Media & Library Sciences. 2018;55:349–358. https://doi.org/10.6120/JoEMLS.201811_55(3).e001.BC.BE; Cortegiani A., Ippolito M., Ingoglia G., Manca A., Cugusi L., Severin A., Strinzel M., Panzarella V., Campisi G., Manoj L., Gregoretti C., Einav S., Moher D., Giarratano A. Citations and metrics of journals discontinued from Scopus for publication concerns: The GhoS(t)copus Project. F1000Research. 2020;9:415. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23847.2; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Is the validity, credibility and reliability of literature indexed in PubMed at risk? Medical Journal Armed Forces India. 2023;79:601–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2021.03.009; Munn Z., Barker T., Stern C., Pollock D., Ross-White A., Klugar M., Wiechula R., Aromataris E., Shamseer L. Should I include studies from “predatory” journals in a systematic review? Interim guidance for systematic reviewers. JBI Evidence Synthesis. 2021;19:1915–1923. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-21-00138; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Kendall G. Mis(-classification) of 17,721 journals by an artificial intelligence predatory journal detector. Publishing Research Quarterly. 2023;39:263–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-023-09956-y; Yamada Y., Teixeira da Silva J. A. A psychological perspective towards understanding the objective and subjective gray zones in predatory publishing. Quality & Quantity. 2022;56:4075–4087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01307-3; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Academic librarians and their role in disseminating accurate knowledge and information about the gray zone in predatory publishing. New Review of Academic Librarianship. 2022;28:383–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2022.2039242; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Kimotho S. G. Signs of divisiveness, discrimination and stigmatization caused by Jeffrey Beall’s “predatory” open access publishing blacklists and philosophy. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2022;48:102418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102418; Chirico F. “Predatory journals” or “predatory scholars”? The essential role of the peer review process. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2017;8:186–188. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijoem.2017.1082; Al-Khatib A., Teixeira da Silva J. A. Is biomedical research protected from predatory reviewers? Science and Engineering Ethics. 2019;25:293–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9964-5; Olivarez J. D., Bales S., Sare L., van Duinkerken W. Format aside: applying Beall’s criteria to assess the predatory nature of both OA and non-OA library and information science journals. College and Research Libraries. 2018;79:52–67. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.52; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Al-Khatib A., Tsigaris P. Spam emails in academia: Issues and costs. Scientometrics. 2020;122:1171–1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03315-5; Clements J. C., Daigle R. M., Froehlich H. E. Predator in the pool? A quantitative evaluation of nonindexed open access journals in aquaculture research. Frontiers in Marine Science. 2018;5:106. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00106; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Citations and gamed metrics: Academic integrity lost. Academic Questions. 2021;34:96–99. https://doi.org/10.51845/34s.1.18; Siler K., Larivière V. Who games metrics and rankings? Institutional niches and journal impact factor inflation. Research Policy. 2022;51:104608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104608; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Nazarovets S. The role of Publons in the context of open peer review. Publishing Research Quarterly. 2022;38:760–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09914-0; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Are negative reviews, predatory reviewers or failed peer review rewarded at Publons? International Orthopaedics. 2020;44:2193–2194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04587-w; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Al-Khatib A. How do Clarivate Analytics and Publons propose to fortify peer review in the COVID-19 era? Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences. 2021;16:139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2021.01.008; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Is the continued claim of indexing in Publons by journals a predatory publishing characteristic? Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology. 2023;52:448–449. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2023.06.006; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Nazarovets S. Publication history: A double DOI-based method to store and/or monitor information about published and corrected academic literature. Journal of Scholarly Publishing. 2022;53:85–108. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.53.2.2017-0017; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Conflicts of interest arising from simultaneous service by editors of competing journals or publishers. Publications. 2021;9:6. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010006; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Should editors with multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct serve on journal editor boards? European Science Editing. 2022;48:e95926. https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2022.e95926; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Vuong Q-H. Editors with multiple retractions, but who serve on journal editorial boards: Case studies. Epistēmēs Metron Logos. 2023;9:1–8. https://doi.org/10.12681/eml.33935; Al-Khatib A., Teixeira da Silva J. A. What rights do authors have? Science and Engineering Ethics. 2017;23:947–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9808-8; Nishikawa-Pacher A. Who are the 100 largest scientific publishers by journal count? A webscraping approach. Journal of Documentation. 2022;78:450–463. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-04-2022-0083; Teixeira da Silva J. A., Fassin Y. Reflection on the Springer Nature initial public offering attempts in an evolving academic publishing market. Learned Publishing. 2022;35:448–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1453; Teixeira da Silva J. A. Tumor Biology’s struggle to survive: A tough lesson for cancer research journals. Forum of Clinical Oncology. 2022;13:23–25. https://doi.org/10.2478/fco-2022-0001; https://www.scieditor.ru/jour/article/view/361