Decoding Correlations in Predatory Business Practices and Physicians' Strategies Against Daily Predatory Emails

Area of Science:

• Bibliometrics
• Scholarly Communication
• Scientific Publishing Ethics

Background:

• Predatory journals exploit inadequate editorial and peer review standards, undermining global scientific publishing norms.
• Understanding researcher interactions with predatory publishing is crucial for maintaining academic integrity.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the correlation between participant demographics and experiences with predatory publishing.
• To analyze how researchers manage unsolicited predatory emails.

Main Methods:

• A Google Form survey was distributed to collect data on physicians' experiences with predatory publishing.
• Data from 978 participants across 58 countries, collected between September 2021 and April 2022, were analyzed.

Main Results:

• A significant association exists between academic level and the volume of predatory emails received (p<0.001).
• PhD holders receive over 10 predatory emails weekly, significantly more than non-PhD holders (p<0.001).
• Researchers with higher publication counts tend to delete emails, while those with higher H-indexes are more likely to respond.

Conclusions:

• Predatory email reception patterns vary by academic status and age.
• Academic productivity metrics, such as publication count and H-index, are important factors in understanding engagement with predatory solicitations.