COPE论坛15 December 2020: Predatory publishing

Predatory publishing: where do we go from here?

因为COPE起草了一份关于predatory publishing2019年，关于这一问题的各个方面发表了更多的学术论文，因此不乏对实践的研究。然而，尽管研究可能是必要的，但这并不是对掠夺性出版商相关问题的充分回应。因此，而且最近，对话转向了更注重实践的解决办法。

作为对掠夺性期刊、会议和出版商的持续繁荣和增长的回应，COPE或其他行业组织下一步可能会考虑采取什么措施？

演讲嘉宾

除了考虑以下问题外，Kelly Cobey博士还将描述由Centre for Journalology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Canada. Dr Cobey will present the centre’s approach to educating the scholarly community about the nature of journal quality and transparency practices.

Kelly is a Senior Clinical Research Associate in the Knowledge Synthesis Group at the Ottawa Methods Centre at Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. In her capacity as Publications Officer she provides educational outreach on best practice in academic biomedical publishing. Kelly is a member of EQUATOR Canada, an Adjunct Professor in the School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventative Medicine at the University of Ottawa, and an Honorary Researcher at The University of Stirling. She obtained her PhD in Psychology (University of Groningen, The Netherlands) and has an MRes in Biology (University of Liverpool, England) and BSc in Psychology and Biology (McMaster University, Canada). Kelly also worked as a Lecturer at The University of Stirling (Scotland) and held a Fyssen Research Fellowship (University of Paris North, France).

Questions for discussion

• Should COPE use its criteria for membership as an instrument to evaluate standards of scholarly publishing vehicles for the purpose of informing authors, peer reviewers, readers, scholars invited to serve on editorial boards, and universities evaluating scholarly productivity?

• Should COPE and/or other industry organisations form a global compact of signatories to commit to the practice of research and publication integrity and further to the active marginalisation of predatory publishing within the scholarly communities of universities, editors, and publishers? ThePrinciples of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing可能被认为是事实上的组织成员标准，如COPE、OASPA、DOAJ和WAME，但这将是对这些原则的积极推进，不仅作为成员标准，而且作为出版物完整性的全球标准。

• COPE和/或其他行业组织是否应该作为第三方收回服务，为那些在不知情的情况下与掠夺性出版商发表文章的作者提供收回服务，而掠夺性出版商既不会收回文章，也不会应作者的要求收回文章？这将包括那些致力于出版从未出现过的出版物的出版商。

Digital journal authenticator project

“The objective of the project is to develop a ‘Digital Journal Authenticator’ tool that can help stakeholders discern journal quality and transparency practices. We will employ a ‘user centred design strategy’, in which stakeholders such as researchers, journals, publishers, research institutions, and the public work with the research team to iteratively develop a tool that best meets their needs. The tool will provide users with a description of how a journal operates and empower them to use this information to determine whether they should interact with the journal (eg, read content, submit to the journal, or reference articles published there). The tool will be disseminated for free and will be open for others to build upon. This tool will help to safeguard against interactions with low quality journals.”

注册论坛

Following the discussion around predatory publishing, COPE members'publication ethics caseswill be presented for discussion and advice from the Forum participants.

Register to attend the Forum，12月15日星期二，下午2:00-3:30（格林尼治标准时间）。

The Forum takes place by webinar and is available to COPE members only.

Your comments

Please do leave any comments below, whether or not you are planning on joining the meeting.

评论are reviewed and, on approval, added below.