A psychological perspective towards understanding the objective and subjective gray zones in predatory publishing

Abstract A continued lack of clarity persists because academics, policymakers, and other interested parties are unable to clearly define what is a “predatory” journal or publisher, potentially wide gray zone exists there. In this perspective, we argue that journals should be evaluated on continuum, not just in two shades, black white. Since evaluations about might constitute made by humans, the psychological decision-making system determines them may induce biases. Considering such human characteristics shed light deterministic criteria have been used, continue classify publisher as “predatory”, perhaps, bring additional discussion. Better methods evaluation can obtained when factors polarize identified. As one example, need move away from simply using whitelists blacklists educate individual researchers how evaluate journals. This paper serves an educational tool providing more “gray” publishing zone, argues currently available qualitative quantitative systems fused deterministically appreciate zonation white, journals, so possibly reduce eliminate influence cognitive “perception” bias debate.