Predatory publisher and impact factor: The murky landscape of scholastic publication

Exclusion of the non-English-speaking world from the scientific literature: Recommendations for change for addiction journals and publishers

Background: While English is only the native language of 7.3% of the world's population and less than 20% can speak the language, nearly 75% of all scientific publications are English. Aim: To describe how and why scientific contributions from the non-English-speaking world have been excluded from addiction literature, and put forward suggestions for making this literature more accessible to the non-English-speaking population. Methods: A working group of the International Society of Addiction Journal Editors (ISAJE) conducted an iterative review of issues related to scientific publishing from the non-English-speaking world. Findings: We discuss several issues stemming from the predominance of English in the scientific addiction literature, including historical drivers, why this matters, and proposed solutions, focusing on the increased availability of translation services. Conclusion: The addition of non-English-speaking authors, editorial team members, and journals will increase the value, impact, and transparency of research findings and increase the accountability and inclusivity of scientific publications.

Predatory Publishing Is a Threat to Non-Mainstream Science

This article highlights the issue of wasteful publishing practices that primarily affect non-mainstream science countries and rapidly growing academic disciplines. Numerous start-up open access publishers with soft or nonexistent quality checks and huge commercial interests have created a global crisis in the publishing market. Their publishing practices have been thoroughly examined, leading to the blacklisting of many journals by Jeffrey Beall. However, it appears that some subscription journals are also falling short of adhering to the international recommendations of global editorial associations. Unethical editing agencies that promote their services in non-mainstream science countries create more problems for inexperienced authors. It is suggested to regularly monitor the quality of already indexed journals and upgrade criteria of covering new sources by the Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science), Scopus, and specialist bibliographic databases. Regional awareness campaigns to inform stakeholders of science communication about the importance of ethical writing, transparency of editing services, and permanent archiving can be also helpful for eradicating unethical publishing practices.