Understanding and Mitigating the Menace of Predatory Journals: Perspectives of University Teachers in Bangladesh
Saved in:
| Title: | Understanding and Mitigating the Menace of Predatory Journals: Perspectives of University Teachers in Bangladesh |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Umme Habiba (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Academic Ethics. 2025 23(2):305-328. |
| Availability: | BioMed Central, Ltd. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://www.springer.com/gp/biomedical-sciences |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 24 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Periodicals, Deception, Ethics, College Faculty, Teacher Attitudes, Foreign Countries, Writing for Publication, Open Educational Resources, Knowledge Level, Gender Differences, Teaching Experience |
| Geographic Terms: | Bangladesh |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10805-024-09538-3 |
| ISSN: | 1570-1727 1572-8544 |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the perspectives of university teachers in Bangladesh regarding predatory journals, assesses their knowledge of the characteristics of such journals, investigates the factors that might influence their submission of papers to such journals, and explores their views on how universities can contribute to the identification of predatory journals. A total of 391 university teachers participated in this study. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine the relationship between participants' demographic characteristics and their perceptions of open access and predatory journals. The findings revealed that several demographic variables were significantly related to university teachers' perceptions of predatory journals. Among the respondents who reported possessing a good knowledge of predatory journals (n = 181), their understanding levels were assessed by assigning a score of '1' for each correct answer and '0' for each incorrect/unsure answer to 18 characteristics associated with predatory publishing. The scores obtained by this group of participants were transformed into percentiles and were categorized into three different understanding levels: poor, medium and high. The results of independent sample t-tests and ANOVA found significant differences in total correctness scores based on gender, designation and teaching experience. The study revealed that only 7% of participants had a high level of understanding of the characteristics, despite claiming to have a good knowledge of predatory journals. The findings of this study highlight the need to design and implement interventions to increase the awareness levels and combat the prevalence of predatory publishing in the academic community. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1485405 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the perspectives of university teachers in Bangladesh regarding predatory journals, assesses their knowledge of the characteristics of such journals, investigates the factors that might influence their submission of papers to such journals, and explores their views on how universities can contribute to the identification of predatory journals. A total of 391 university teachers participated in this study. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine the relationship between participants' demographic characteristics and their perceptions of open access and predatory journals. The findings revealed that several demographic variables were significantly related to university teachers' perceptions of predatory journals. Among the respondents who reported possessing a good knowledge of predatory journals (n = 181), their understanding levels were assessed by assigning a score of '1' for each correct answer and '0' for each incorrect/unsure answer to 18 characteristics associated with predatory publishing. The scores obtained by this group of participants were transformed into percentiles and were categorized into three different understanding levels: poor, medium and high. The results of independent sample t-tests and ANOVA found significant differences in total correctness scores based on gender, designation and teaching experience. The study revealed that only 7% of participants had a high level of understanding of the characteristics, despite claiming to have a good knowledge of predatory journals. The findings of this study highlight the need to design and implement interventions to increase the awareness levels and combat the prevalence of predatory publishing in the academic community. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-1727 1572-8544 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10805-024-09538-3 |
