Evaluating publishing channels

When choosing publication channels, one of the most important issues is to assess the reliability of the channel. On this page you will find information on quality criteria and tools for quality assessment.

When choosing open access publishing channels, particular attention should be paid to quality criteria. The reliability of open access channels can be assessed by looking at subjective, qualitative and quantitative indicators. Tools have also been developed to assess the reliability and quality of the channel.

The following tools are available for quality assessment:

  • You can check the rating level of key publications in your discipline on the Publication Forum’s Jufo portal, which is maintained by the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies (TSV) and the scientific community to support quality assessment of publication channels. The service is particularly good for finding domestic journals, book series, conferences and publishers.
  • The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a curated database of peer-reviewed, high-quality open access journals. The database provides a relatively comprehensive set of information, in particular on international open access journals.
  • The Cabells database lists open access journals that have been identified as predatory and are therefore not recommended as publication channels. In Cabells, the University of Helsinki has a Predatory reports section consisting of a database of predatory journals. The search results provide a list of violations that have led to the inclusion of the journal in the database.

You should also pay attention to the typical aspects of high-quality open access publication channels. Below you will find a list of both the characteristics of quality publication channels and the typical features of a predatory publication.

Need support to assess reliability?

Contact the library's open science experts: openaccess@helsinki.fi
  • The journal is peer-reviewed and can be found on DOAJ.
  • The journal is published by a member of OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association).
  • The publication is at least level 1 in the Publication Forum (Jufo).Please note that not all Jufo 0 publications are predatory publications, see also the User guide for the Publication Forum classification.
  • The journal is listed in scientific citation databases such as Web of Science and Scopus.
  • Journal information (editorial board, publisher, impact indicators, article fees) is clearly displayed on the website. Please note, that not all OA journals charge authors' fees.
  • The journal has an ISSN identifier and uses persistent identifiers such as DOIs for its publications.
  • The journal's editorial board includes well-known researchers in the field and has published high-quality articles by well-known researchers.
  • The peer review process is transparent and its principles are explained. The peer review process usually takes at least one month.
  • Issues are published regularly and their long-term preservation is ensured.
  • There are high standards for manuscripts, and the rejection rate can also be looked at.
  • A quality journal rarely markets aggressively, for example by email.
  • The journal does not normally publish previously published research papers, with the exception of those that popularise science.

A predatory publication/publisher is an open access journal or its publisher that seeks to make money through open access publishing rather than promoting science. Predatory journals charge an author's fee (article processing charge, APC), but they are not professionally edited scientific publications, even if they try to appear that way. The article may not even be published. It is estimated that there are more than 15 000 predatory publications.

Sometimes predatory journals are also called vanity publications, because some researchers may publish in them even though they know the scientific quality of the journals is low. When the peer review process in these journals is only apparent, it is easy to get published and the number of publications on a researcher's CV increases rapidly.

Recently, the distinction between predatory journals and proper but low-quality journals has narrowed, making it more difficult to identify predatory journals.

The following characteristics are typical of predatory publications

  • Peer review is an ostensible, often very quick process. As such, the content of articles can be inaccurate or misleading.
  • Publication services are aggressively marketed, for example by email, even outside the researcher's area of expertise.
  • The journal titles are similar to those of well-known publications.
  • Information, especially article fees (APCs), is unclearly presented on the website.
  • The process for reviewing manuscript proposals is not described.
  • Editorial boards have only few, if any, well-known researchers in the field. It may also be the case that a well-known researcher is listed on the editorial board without consent.
  • The journal has no membership of open access publishing organisations or journal directories (DOAJ, OASPA).
  • There is no information about the copyright owner on the journal's website, nor are there any persistent identifiers or CC licences. Note that this is sometimes the case for non-predatory publications.
  • The journal is classified as category 0 on the Publication Forum (Jufo). Please note that not all Jufo category 0 publications are predatory publications.

Other harmful phenomena related to publishing

  • Hijacked journals. These journals may falsely resemble well-known journals by copying their name, layout and metadata. The aim is to collect publication fees from researchers who think they are publishing in the original journal.
  • Paper mills are companies that produce low-quality or untruthful articles on a factory scale. These articles are sold to interested parties for publication or submitted to scientific journals.
  • Scientific articles written with the help of artificial intelligence. The pressure to publish can lead to the use of AI to write an article without explicitly mentioning it. However, such papers can often be identified by certain criteria.
  • For more information, see for example the Retraction Watch.

Need help?

You can always contact the library's open science experts at openaccess@helsinki.fi

Frontiers is a Swiss publisher of open access journals. The company has a very large number of journals of varying levels – some of very high quality, but most are only just-qualified scientific publishing channels. Some are of lower quality, as reflected, for example, in their Jufo rating.

Frontiers publishes many articles and is popular among researchers for its efficiency. The University of Helsinki has a FinElib consortium agreement for open access publishing with Frontiers, but APC support is only available for Frontier journals with a Jufo rating of 1–3.

The Swiss-based MDPI is one of the largest publishers of open access journals in the world, but its activities are not without controversy. The company has a very wide range of journals of varying quality – some are very high quality, but others are very low quality, which is reflected for example in their Jufo rating. Many MDPI and Frontiers journals are in the Jufo 0 category.

One of the characteristics of the MDPI is the publication of special issues. The rapid publication process has led to some questionable articles passing through the reviewing process. For this reason, MDPI is considered by many to be a predatory publisher. However, MDPI is not listed in the Cabells database, which lists predatory journals; in the Publication Forum (Jufo), MDPI is ranked 0 as a publisher, but the ratings of journals vary.

It is worth paying attention to the level of individual journals in the MDPI. The Publication Forum's (Jufo) ratings are helpful here. The University of Helsinki has an open access agreement with MDPI. Please note, however, that to qualify for the library's publication fee (APC) support, the journal must be in Jufo categories 1–3. 

Services that popularise science republish peer-reviewed scientific articles and books for a fee. The articles are presented in a way that readers can understand, with pictures, and are published on attractive online platforms or in journals. The service provides the researcher with an easy-to-distribute, general-interest version of their article. Service providers include both legitimate companies, such as Research Outreach and Scientia Global, and predatory publishers: Innovation News Network, Intech Open and Open Access Government are providers to be wary of.

Researchers also receive requests based on the possibilities offered by the CC licence. If a research article or book has been published under an open CC BY licence that allows commercial exploitation, the researcher may be asked if they would be willing to republish the article for a fee. Such publishing services also include operators such as Researchpod, which edit articles into short manuscripts and podcasts.

The University of Helsinki does not financially support publication in the above-mentioned services aimed at popularising science. However, it is up to the researcher to decide whether such popularisation services are useful.