Blog Libraries

Librarian's Guide: Vetting Journals and Avoiding Predatory Publishers

Michael Byer, Institutional Partnerships Lead

The landscape of scholarly publishing has grown increasingly complex, and academic librarians managing collections face mounting pressure to navigate this complexity wisely. With library budgets stretched thin, multiple business models competing for resources, and the ever-present threat of predatory publishers exploiting the open access movement, the responsibility of vetting journals has never been more critical, or more challenging.

The stakes are high for librarians. Every subscription decision, every transformative agreement, and every open access partnership shapes not just your collection but the broader scholarly communication ecosystem. This article provides practical frameworks for identifying credible journals, avoiding predatory publishers, and making strategic choices that support both your institution's needs and the health of ethical scholarly publishing.

Understanding the Predatory Publishing Threat

Predatory publishers exploit the open access model by charging article processing charges (APCs) without providing legitimate peer review, editorial services, or sustainable archiving. They undermine trust in open access publishing, waste researchers' limited funding, and pollute the ecosystem with low-quality or non-peer reviewed research.

The challenge for librarians is that predatory publishers have become increasingly sophisticated. They mimic the websites of legitimate journals, fabricate editorial boards featuring prominent scholars without permission, and employ aggressive marketing tactics. Distinguishing predatory operations from legitimate publishers requires awareness and systematic evaluation.

The consequences of failing to identify predatory publishers extend beyond wasted resources. When libraries inadvertently provide access to or recommend predatory journals, their institutional credibility suffers. Researchers may unknowingly publish in predatory publisher journals, damaging their careers and ultimately undermining your library's reputation as a trusted advisor for scholarly communication.

Essential Tools for Vetting Journals

Fortunately, librarians have access to reliable tools and databases that simplify the vetting process while demonstrating your value as strategic information professionals.

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)

The DOAJ serves as the gold standard for identifying legitimate open access journals. DOAJ maintains rigorous inclusion criteria including:

peer review processes
editorial transparency
licensing clarity
preservation policies

Journals indexed in DOAJ have been vetted against these standards, providing librarians with confidence in their quality and legitimacy. When evaluating whether to support an open access journal—whether through institutional memberships, author fund allocations, or inclusion in discovery systems—DOAJ indexing should be your first checkpoint. If a journal isn't indexed in DOAJ, that alone doesn't disqualify it (particularly for newer journals still building their operations), but it warrants deeper investigation before committing resources.

Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)

OASPA membership provides another reliable indicator of publisher legitimacy. OASPA members are committed to best practices in open access publishing, including:

transparent peer review
clear business models
editorial independence
ethical marketing practices

The organization vets membership applications rigorously, requiring evidence of sustainable operations and commitment to quality. When negotiating institutional agreements or evaluating new open access publishers, OASPA membership signals that a publisher has been vetted by industry peers and adheres to ethical standards. This becomes particularly valuable when considering agreements or institutional memberships with publishers outside the traditional commercial publishers.

Think. Check. Submit.

Think. Check. Submit. provides a practical checklist helping researchers—and librarians—evaluate journal legitimacy quickly. The tool prompts users to examine website professionalism, editorial board transparency, contact information clarity, peer review process descriptions, and indexing in recognized databases.

As a librarian, you can help your users by incorporating Think. Check. Submit. into your researcher support services. When faculty ask for guidance on where to publish or whether a journal is legitimate, you can direct them to this resource. By positioning yourself as the expert who connects researchers with reliable vetting tools, you demonstrate ongoing value regardless of your budgetary constraints.

Red Flags: What to Watch For

Beyond using trusted databases, librarians should recognize common warning signs of predatory publishers:

Aggressive solicitation: Legitimate journals don't send unsolicited emails promising rapid publication or guaranteed acceptance. Predatory publishers spam researchers with flattering invitations to publish or join editorial boards.
Opaque peer review: If a journal claims peer review but provides no details about the process, timeline, or reviewer qualifications, proceed with skepticism. Legitimate journals are transparent about editorial processes.
Suspicious editorial boards: Check whether listed editorial board members actually agreed to serve. A quick Google search or email inquiry can reveal fabricated boards. Legitimate journals feature engaged editorial boards with verifiable affiliations.
Unclear business models: Predatory publishers often bury fee information or present confusing, inconsistent pricing. Legitimate publishers clearly communicate APCs, waivers, and payment processes upfront.
Poor website quality: While aesthetics alone don't determine legitimacy, websites riddled with grammatical errors, broken links, or inconsistent branding warrant suspicion.
Hard to believe claims: Extraordinarily rapid publication timelines, guaranteed acceptance, or claims of impact factors for very young journals should raise red flags.

Strategic Decision-Making in Complex Publishing Environments

Vetting individual journals is only part of your challenge. You're also navigating multiple business models: subscription, transformative agreements, read-and-publish deals, subscribe-to-open initiatives, as well as immediate open access; each with distinct implications for your budget, collection, and values.

The Transformative Agreement Dilemma

Transformative agreements with large commercial publishers promise to transition spending from subscriptions to open access while maintaining reading access. These deals offer administrative simplicity—one negotiation unlocks unlimited OA publishing for your researchers while ensuring continued access to journal collections.

However, these agreements create an unintended consequence: they can systematically disadvantage independent, mission-driven open access publishers. When institutional OA budgets flow primarily to transformative agreements with Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley, researchers face strong incentives to publish within those portfolios. Why navigate separate APC payments when "free" options exist within the transformative agreement?

This dynamic harms publishers like society publishers, university presses, and independent OA pioneers, organizations, like JMIR, that built sustainable open access models when commercial publishers defended paywalls. These publishers championed researcher rights, experimented with innovative approaches, and proved open access could work. Yet as transformative agreements proliferate, these independents risk marginalization despite often offering superior value, more ethical business models, and deeper commitment to open access principles.

Supporting Publisher Diversity: The Right Thing and the Smart Strategy

As stewards of scholarly communication, librarians must balance administrative efficiency with ecosystem health. This means deliberately supporting independent, ethical open access publishers even when transformative agreements offer convenience.

Practical strategies:

Allocate dedicated APC funds for non-transformative agreement publishers: Establish pools specifically supporting publication in DOAJ-indexed, OASPA-member journals outside major commercial transformative agreements. This ensures researchers can choose quality independent publishers without financial penalty.
Pursue institutional memberships with mission-driven publishers: Many society publishers and independent OA publishers offer institutional memberships providing discounted or waived APCs for your researchers. These partnerships often deliver superior value through direct support for publishers whose missions align with academic values, simplified APC administration, and often lower per-article costs than commercial alternatives.
Advocate for transformative agreements that include independent publishers: When negotiating with consortia or publishers, push for models that support publisher diversity. Some consortia are developing agreements encompassing multiple independent publishers, creating administrative simplicity while supporting ecosystem diversity.
Educate researchers about publisher choice: Help your faculty understand the implications of publishing choices beyond their immediate needs. Position journal selection as not just "where will my work be visible?" but "what kind of scholarly communication ecosystem am I supporting?"

Demonstrating Value

Budget pressures create pressure to justify every expenditure. Supporting diverse publishers, including smaller independent OA journals, requires articulating value clearly to administrators and stakeholders. You can do this by:

Frame vetting expertise as strategic asset: Your ability to distinguish legitimate from predatory publishers, identify high-quality independent journals, and navigate complex business models protects institutional reputation and researcher careers. Quantify this: How many predatory journal submissions have you helped faculty avoid? What percentage of your OA spending supports verified, high-quality journals?
Highlight impact metrics: Demonstrate that supporting independent OA publishers provides access to cutting-edge research. Many specialized society journals publish the most innovative work in their fields despite smaller overall output. Your strategic support ensures researchers access complete, quality collections, not just large commercial portfolios.
Emphasize ethical leadership: Positioning your institution as supporting diverse, mission-driven publishers rather than concentrating funding among commercial oligopolies demonstrates values-based leadership. This resonates with faculty, administrators, and donors increasingly concerned about academic publishing ethics.
Show administrative efficiency gains: Contrary to assumptions, supporting independent publishers needn't create administrative burden. Institutional memberships with DOAJ-indexed publishers often provide simpler workflows than managing individual APCs or negotiating with commercial publishers' complex bureaucracies.

Your evolving expertise in these areas isn't just professional development, it's strategic positioning. As scholarly communication grows more complex, your specialized knowledge becomes increasingly valuable to your institution.

Vetting as Strategic Leadership

Vetting journals and avoiding predatory publishers is more than risk management; it's an opportunity to exercise strategic leadership in scholarly communication. By systematically using tools like DOAJ and OASPA membership verification, recognizing predatory publisher warning signs, and deliberately supporting independent ethical publishers, you position yourself and your library as essential partners in advancing open, ethical, sustainable scholarly communication.

As a pioneer in open access publishing, JMIR Publications is committed to driving innovation in scholarly communications, advancing digital health research, and promoting open science principles. Partnering with an independent, mission-driven publisher like JMIR can help your institution support a sustainable OA infrastructure.

Contact our Institutional Partnership Team today to discuss a JMIR Institutional Partnership.