Cases of how some emerging journals and publishers provide homes for 'abused' scholarly works: Pedagogical and humanity implications for 'predatory' discourse

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Some emerging journals and publishers are often and quickly derogated as predatory and quality research manuscripts are sometimes rejected for reasons that are not clear. What is yet to be articulated is how emerging journals are providing homes for abused scholarly works.
This case report presents three examples of manuscripts that were rejected with incongruent reviewers’ opinions. Two were separately rejected twice before accepted by a third publisher and the third example illustrates how an editor may uphold the pedagogical perspective of oversight on manuscript submission and acceptance process. The discussion focuses on unconscious bias in reviews and perhaps the need for clear guidelines and training of reviewers as well as for editors and publishers. Further, stakeholders need to reflect on how the rejection of manuscripts with unclear reasons amounts to ‘predatory’ journalism.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)87-100
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Research in Education Humanities and Commerce
Volume2
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - May 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cases of how some emerging journals and publishers provide homes for 'abused' scholarly works: Pedagogical and humanity implications for 'predatory' discourse'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this