The dark side of publishing: Unveiling the deceptive tactics of cloned journals in India

The study examines two lists of cloned journals (Group I and Group II) compiled by the University Grants Commission-Consortium for Academic and Research Ethics (UGC-CARE) in India. India has emerged as a hotspot for predatory publishing, justifying the reliance on the UGC-CARE list. The study explores the role of language as a tool for cloning legitimate journals and reveals that cloned journals adopt the English language to deceive and attract submissions. Additionally, it investigates the techniques used by cloned journals to modify their appearance and nomenclature. The results indicate that 40.47% of cloned journals maintain the original title, 42.86% make minor changes by adding terms like 'international' and 'journal', and 16.67% undergo major alterations. The study also examines the permanence and stability of the domains associated with cloned journals, finding that 52.50% of URLs were active and a significant number were inactive. Among these, the highest domain names include .com (commercial), followed by.org (organisation), as cloned journals prefer these to appear more credible and trustworthy. Furthermore, the study analyses the subject coverage of cloned journals to understand whether their focus is on specific disciplines. The findings reveal that they adopt a multidisciplinary approach to their deceptive practices. By providing valuable insights and raising awareness of how cloned journals deceive authors, this study serves as a significant step against these fraudulent practices. The main limitation of this study is that it relies on a single data source, the UGC CARE List India.