Cargando…

You are invited to submit…

The academic community is under great pressure to publish. This pressure is compounded by high rejection rates at many journals. A more recent trend is for some journals to send invitations directly to researchers inviting them to submit a manuscript to their journals. Many researchers find these in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moher, David, Srivastava, Anubhav
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4524126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26239633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0423-3
_version_ 1782384160895139840
author Moher, David
Srivastava, Anubhav
author_facet Moher, David
Srivastava, Anubhav
author_sort Moher, David
collection PubMed
description The academic community is under great pressure to publish. This pressure is compounded by high rejection rates at many journals. A more recent trend is for some journals to send invitations directly to researchers inviting them to submit a manuscript to their journals. Many researchers find these invitations annoying and unsure how best to respond to them. We collected electronic invitations to submit a manuscript to a journal between April 1, 2014, and March 31, 2015. We analyzed their content and cross-tabulated them against journals listed in Beall’s list of potential predatory journals. During this time period, 311 invitations were received for 204 journals, the majority of which were in Beall’s list (n = 244; 79 %). The invitations came throughout the calendar year and some journals sent up to six invitations. The majority of journals claimed to provide peer review (n = 179; 57.6 %) although no mention was made of expedited review process. Similarly, more than half of the journals claimed to be open access (n = 186; 59.8 %). The majority of invitations included an unsubscribe link (n = 187; 60.1 %). About half of the invitations came from biomedical journals (n = 179). We discuss strategies researchers and institutions can consider to reduce the number of invitations received and strategies to handle those invitations that make it to the recipients’ inbox, thus helping to maintain the credibility and reputation of researchers and institutions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4524126
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45241262015-08-05 You are invited to submit… Moher, David Srivastava, Anubhav BMC Med Correspondence The academic community is under great pressure to publish. This pressure is compounded by high rejection rates at many journals. A more recent trend is for some journals to send invitations directly to researchers inviting them to submit a manuscript to their journals. Many researchers find these invitations annoying and unsure how best to respond to them. We collected electronic invitations to submit a manuscript to a journal between April 1, 2014, and March 31, 2015. We analyzed their content and cross-tabulated them against journals listed in Beall’s list of potential predatory journals. During this time period, 311 invitations were received for 204 journals, the majority of which were in Beall’s list (n = 244; 79 %). The invitations came throughout the calendar year and some journals sent up to six invitations. The majority of journals claimed to provide peer review (n = 179; 57.6 %) although no mention was made of expedited review process. Similarly, more than half of the journals claimed to be open access (n = 186; 59.8 %). The majority of invitations included an unsubscribe link (n = 187; 60.1 %). About half of the invitations came from biomedical journals (n = 179). We discuss strategies researchers and institutions can consider to reduce the number of invitations received and strategies to handle those invitations that make it to the recipients’ inbox, thus helping to maintain the credibility and reputation of researchers and institutions. BioMed Central 2015-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4524126/ /pubmed/26239633 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0423-3 Text en © Moher and Srivastava. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Correspondence
Moher, David
Srivastava, Anubhav
You are invited to submit…
title You are invited to submit…
title_full You are invited to submit…
title_fullStr You are invited to submit…
title_full_unstemmed You are invited to submit…
title_short You are invited to submit…
title_sort you are invited to submit…
topic Correspondence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4524126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26239633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0423-3
work_keys_str_mv AT moherdavid youareinvitedtosubmit
AT srivastavaanubhav youareinvitedtosubmit