Skip to Main Content

Predatory Publishing Guide

Red Flags

The following table summarizes key characteristics and red flags of predatory journals and predatory conferences. If you answer "yes" to a majority of the characteristics, the journal or conference may be predatory. Refer to the related sections in the Guide for more information

Characteristic

Predatory Journal

Predatory Conference

Journal or Conference Operations
  • Aggressive solicitation practices through spam emails. Communication quality may be low.
  • Fast publication timeline may occur at the expense of rigorous peer review and quality checks.
  • Goal is to make money from article processing charges, not publish scholarly research.
  • Aggressive solicitation practices through spam emails. Communication quality may be low.
  • Rapid acceptance may occur at the expense of rigorous peer review and quality checks.
  • Goal is to make money from registration and other fees, not share scholarship or research findings.

Editorial and Peer Review Practices
  • Peer review lacks rigor, is expedited, uses template responses.
  • Publication timeline is not realistic for proper peer review.
  • Publishes any work as long as the required payment is made, regardless of quality or relevance.
  • Little or no copy editing is offered.
  • Editorial board is not stated or incomplete and/or non-verifiable.
  • Peer review lacks rigor or is expedited without editorial oversight of abstracts or presentations
  • Provides rapid, hassle-free submission process.
  • Submission acceptance timeline is not realistic for proper peer review.
  • Editorial board is not stated or incomplete and/or non-verifiable.

Business or Publishing or Conference Practices
  • Publisher is not a member of a reputable publishing organization.
  • Journal scope is not defined or too broad.
  • Indexing status is non-verifiable.
  • No International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) is provided.
  • Articles lack digital optical identifiers (DOIs).
  • Cited metrics are either incorrect or non-verifiable.
  • High article processing charges (APCs)  are listed without transparency.
  • Copycat name of legitimate journal.
  • Authors give up their copyright rights at submission, making future submissions difficult.
  • Article submission occurs via email versus specific online platforms such as ScholarOne® and Editorial Manager®.
  • Lack of digital preservation information, author guidelines, copyright, plagiarism, or retraction policies.
  • Conference is not associated with a professional society.
  • Conference organizer is a for-profit company.
  • Supported by unfamiliar open-access journals.
  • Conference scope broad to attract speakers, committee members and attendees which can weaken the rigor.
  • High registration fees for speakers and committee members without providing corresponding value or legitimate academic opportunities. Fees may even be higher than those for attendees.
  • No refunds if the conference is cancelled.
  • Invitees are asked to speak/present on subjects unrelated to their research.
  • Copycat name of legitimate conference name.
  • Conference advisory/planning committee is not listed and/or non-verifiable.
  • If published, conference proceedings are not published in a reputable journal.

Websites
  • Website is unprofessional with grammatical errors, low-resolution images, etc.
  • Website lacks standard content found on reputable publisher websites, i.e., About, Editorial Board, Peer-Review, Indexing, Metrics, Author Guidelines, etc.
  • Website lacks sufficient contact information, verifiable place of business.
  • Website is unprofessional with grammatical errors, low-resolution images, etc.
  • Website lacks standard content found on reputable conference websites, i.e., About, Program, Speakers, Registration, Policies, etc.
  • Website lacks sufficient contact information, verifiable place of business.

References

Elmore, S. A., & Weston, E. H. (2020). Predatory journals: What they are and how to avoid them. Toxicol Pathol, 48(4), 607-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192623320920209

Godskesen, T., Eriksson, S., Oermann, M. H., & Gabrielsson, S. (2022). Predatory conferences: A systematic scoping review. BMJ Open, 12(11), e062425. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062425

The InterAcademy Partnership. (2022). Combatting predatory academic journals and conferences, summary report English. Retrieved April 9, 2025 https://www.interacademies.org/publication/predatory-practices-summary-English

Leducq, S., Bonsu, N., Clement, K., Barlow, R., & Williams, H. C. (2023). Predator and alien: The threat of predatory journals and conferences [Review]. Clinical and Experimental Dermatology, 48(8), 847-853. https://doi.org/10.1093/ced/llad133

Rajakumar, H. K. (2025). Seductive emails, dangerous consequences: How predatory journals, conferences, and publishers target early-career researchers [Article]. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 101(1192), 177-179. https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae167 

Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Maduekwe, O., Turner, L., Barbour, V., Burch, R., Clark, J., Galipeau, J., Roberts, J., & Shea, B. J. (2017). Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: Can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison [Article]. BMC Med, 15(1), Article 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9

Warden, A. M., Soteropulos, C. E., Eftekari, S. C., Nicksic, P. J., Dingle, A. M., & Poore, S. O. (2022). To decline or accept: A guide for determining the legitimacy of academic conference invitations. Ann Plast Surg, 89(1), 8-16. https://doi.org/10.1097/sap.0000000000003180