Skip to Main Content

Scholarly Communications Guide

Evaluating Publishers & Publications

Why Evaluate Journals?

Finding a journal that best fits your research, practices ethical publishing, offers robust peer review, and has a good reputation in your field is all part of the publishing process. Whether publishing in a traditional, hybrid, or Open Access journal, it is important to avoid predatory journals, which employ exploitative funding models and offer sub-par quality. Reviewing the editorial board, funding practices, peer review practices, and website of a journal can help you differentiate predatory journals from reputable ones.

Journal Quality Indicators

The following indicators can help you determine a journal's quality and avoid predatory journals.

Positive Indicators

  • Scope of the journal is well-defined and clearly stated
  • Journal’s primary audience is researchers/practitioners
  • Editor and editorial board are recognized experts in the field
  • Journal is affiliated with or sponsored by an established scholarly society or academic institution
  • Articles are within the scope of the journal and meet the standards of the discipline
  • Any fees or charges for publishing in the journal are easily found on the journal website and clearly explained
  • Articles have Direct Object Identifiers (DOIs)
  • Journal clearly indicates rights for use and re-use of content at article level (e.g., Creative Commons CC BY license)
  • Journal has an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)
  • Publisher is a member of Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association
  • Journal is registered in Ulrichsweb.com, Global Serials Directory
  • Journal is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Journal is included in subject databases and/or indexes

Negative Indicators

  • Journal website is difficult to locate or identify
  • Publisher “About” information is absent on the journal’s website
  • Publisher direct marketing or other advertising is obtrusive
  • More information for authors is not available
  • Information on peer review and copyright is absent or unclear on the journal website
  • Journal scope statement is absent or extremely vague
  • No information is provided about the publisher, or the information provided does not clearly indicate a relationship to a mission to disseminate research content
  • Repeat lead authors in same issue
  • Publisher has a negative reputation (e.g., documented examples in Chronicle of Higher Education, listservs, etc.)

Attribution: These indicators have been adapted from the list created by Grand Valley State University Libraries