A Multidisciplinary Study of Faculty Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Predatory Publishing

Abstract

Introduction: Not enough is known about what faculty understand about predatory journals, how they learn about them, and how they feel about them, which has led to insufficient education and guidance on the phenomenon. Method: A survey was sent to all publishing faculty at a mid-sized doctorate-granting university, and it received 109 responses. The survey covered faculty professional history, departmental culture and environment, criteria for journal selection, and knowledge of and experiences with predatory journals. Results: Almost all faculty had at least heard of predatory publishing and believed it to be a problem. Faculty reported that, most of the time, they learned about it through colleagues and/or the literature in their field. Yet faculty expressed uncertainty about the impact that predatory journals have on their field and expressed hesitance in penalizing colleagues for publishing in them. Discussion: Faculty understanding of fraudulent journals—and of predatory publishing overall—may be too basic for efficient application in complex situations such as exploring new publication opportunities and evaluating scholarship. This leads to incongruencies between faculty values and the courses of action they pursue. Conclusion: It is important to form a fuller picture of faculty relationships with journal publication in order to respond appropriately to their needs. The results from this study inform how academic libraries might work with colleges and other entities on campus to provide early and ongoing professional development.