An Expanded Approach to Evaluating Open Access Journals

The advent of open access publishing necessitates evaluating the quality of a plethora of new journals. The problem of ensuring quality is inherent in the benefits and goals of open access publishing, which attempts to establish a system for reporting research findings that is inclusive and expeditious. However, inclusivity and speed may run counter to the goals of quality and reliability, and the pressure for researchers to publish creates incentives to participate in a fraudulent system. This paper presents an alternative approach to evaluating the legitimacy of open access publications. Those concerned about the quality of open access publishing have attempted to evaluate journals based on criteria that refer to externally available information. The approach used here provides additional, internal information about participation in journals' review processes. This additional information, namely, documentation of the process from submission through review to acceptance, is crucial for evaluating potentially fraudulent open access journals that might appear legitimate based on publicly available information.