Faculty knowledge and attitudes regarding predatory open access journals: a needs assessment study

Area of Science:

• Academic Publishing
• Scholarly Communication
• Research Integrity

Background:

• Predatory open access (OA) journals prioritize profit over research quality, posing risks to faculty careers.
• Despite potential negative impacts on reputation and tenure, faculty engagement with predatory OA journals persists.
• Understanding faculty perceptions is crucial for addressing the challenges posed by predatory publishing.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate faculty knowledge and attitudes concerning predatory open access (OA) journals.
• To identify gaps in faculty ability to recognize and assess the quality of OA journals.
• To inform the development of educational interventions for faculty regarding predatory publishing.

Main Methods:

• A 20-item questionnaire assessed knowledge and attitudes among university and medical school faculty.
• The survey included items to evaluate respondents' ability to identify predatory OA journals.
• Chi-square tests were employed to compare responses between university and medical faculty.

Main Results:

• 23% of 183 surveyed faculty had never heard of predatory OA journals.
• While 87% felt confident in assessing journal quality, only 60% could correctly identify a predatory journal.
• University faculty demonstrated a greater ability to identify predatory journals and higher confidence in assessment compared to medical faculty.

Conclusions:

• Faculty acknowledge predatory OA journals as a significant issue.
• Identified knowledge gaps underscore the need for tailored educational programs.
• Findings will guide the creation of interventions to improve faculty's ability to navigate scholarly publishing.