The ASGLOS Study: A global survey on how predatory journals affect scientific practice

Alessandro Martinino, Oshin Puri, Juan Pablo Scarano Pereira, Eloise Owen, Surobhi Chatterjee, Mohamed Abouelazayem, Wah Yang, Francesk Mulita, Yitka Graham, Chetan Parmar, Dharmanand Ramnarain, Arda Isik, Frank W. J. M. Smeenk, Sjaak Pouwels*, ASGLOS Study Group

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Predatory journals and conferences are an emerging problem in scientific literature as they have financial motives, without guaranteeing scientific quality and exposure. The main objective of the ASGLOS project is to investigate the predatory e-email characteristics, management, and possible consequences and to analyse the extent of the current problem at each academic level. To collect the personal experiences of physicians' mailboxes on predatory publishing, a Google Form & REG; survey was designed and disseminated from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of 978 responses were analysed from 58 countries around the world. A total of 64.8% of participants indicated the need for 3 or fewer emails to acquire a criticality view in distinguishing a real invitation from a spam, while 11.5% still have doubt regardless of how many emails they get. The AGLOS Study clearly highlights the problem of academic e-mail spam by predatory journals and conferences. Our findings signify the importance of providing academic career-oriented advice and organising training sessions to increase awareness of predatory publishing for those conducting scientific research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)207-216
Number of pages10
JournalDeveloping World Bioethics
Volume24
Issue number3
Early online dateAug 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2024

Keywords

  • academic spam
  • electronic mail
  • predatory journal
  • survey
  • time management

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The ASGLOS Study: A global survey on how predatory journals affect scientific practice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this