How to identify fake/predatory journals

What Researchers Must Learn from Recently Discontinued and Questioned Journals

Academic publishing is entering a dangerous phase.

In 2026, predatory journals are no longer easy to identify through poor websites or obvious spam emails alone. Many now appear highly professional, claim indexing credibility, and imitate legitimate scholarly publishing standards convincingly enough to deceive even experienced researchers.

At the same time, databases like Scopus continue discontinuing journals over concerns involving publication quality, peer-review integrity, citation manipulation, editorial misconduct, and abnormal publishing practices.

For PhD scholars, professors, students, and researchers, this creates an uncomfortable reality:

A journal can appear indexed today and become questionable tomorrow.

That’s why researchers must stop evaluating journals based only on indexing badges and start recognizing deeper warning signs.

The recent rise of discontinued and scrutinized journals offers important lessons about how predatory publishing evolves — and how researchers can protect themselves.

1. Rapid Publication Promises

One of the most common warning signs remains extremely fast acceptance timelines.

Many questionable journals advertise:

• publication within days,
• guaranteed acceptance,
• or “fast-track review.”

Real peer review is slow because serious academic evaluation takes time.

When journals prioritize speed over scrutiny, research quality often collapses.

2. Massive Publication Volume

Several journals later flagged or discontinued showed unusually high publication output.

When a journal publishes hundreds or thousands of papers rapidly across multiple disciplines, researchers should ask:

How is meaningful peer review happening at that scale?

Often, it isn’t.

3. Broad, Unfocused Scope

A major red flag in many questionable journals is extreme scope expansion.

If one journal publishes:

• medicine,
• artificial intelligence,
• business,
• education,
• engineering,
• and psychology simultaneously,

that usually signals a volume-driven publishing model rather than subject expertise.

Strong journals maintain editorial specialization.

4. Citation Manipulation

Some discontinued journals faced criticism for abnormal citation patterns.

This includes:

• excessive self-citation,
• forced citations,
• citation stacking between journals,
• or artificial metric inflation.

Researchers should always evaluate whether references inside published papers appear genuinely relevant.

5. Weak Peer Review Transparency

Many questionable journals provide vague statements like:

“High-quality international peer review.”

But offer no explanation regarding:

• reviewer selection,
• review duration,
• revision standards,
• or editorial procedures.

Legitimate journals explain their process clearly.

6. Overuse of AI-Generated Content

The AI publishing explosion has intensified concerns across academic publishing.

Some journals increasingly publish papers that appear:

• structurally correct,
• grammatically polished,
• but intellectually shallow.

This creates what many researchers now describe as “synthetic scholarship” — content that imitates academic writing without meaningful contribution.

7. Editorial Board Irregularities

Predatory and questionable journals often:

• list inactive scholars,
• use fake editorial members,
• or display professors without consent.

Researchers should verify whether editorial board members are genuinely associated with the journal.

8. Aggressive Email Solicitation

Many predatory publishers aggressively target:

• PhD candidates,
• first-time authors,
• and international researchers.

Common tactics include:

• excessive flattery,
• unrelated publication invitations,
• and urgent submission deadlines.

Legitimate journals rarely behave like marketing campaigns.

9. Fake or Misleading Metrics

A dangerous trend in questionable publishing is fake impact indicators.

Some journals advertise:

• unofficial citation scores,
• fabricated rankings,
• or misleading indexing claims.

Researchers should independently verify indexing through official Scopus, Web of Science, or DOAJ databases.

10. Sudden Journal Discontinuation

One of the strongest warning signs is instability.

Several journals once actively indexed were later discontinued after concerns emerged involving:

• publication ethics,
• peer review quality,
• citation behavior,
• or publisher integrity.

Researchers must understand that indexing status can change.

Being indexed temporarily does not automatically guarantee long-term credibility.

11. Poorly Reviewed Special Issues

Special issues have become a major vulnerability in academic publishing.

Some journals dramatically increased publication numbers through loosely managed guest-edited special issues with limited review oversight.

This became one of the major reasons certain journals later faced scrutiny.

12. Commercial Pressure Over Academic Standards

Predatory publishing is fundamentally driven by business incentives.

When journals prioritize:

• APC revenue,
• publication volume,
• and author acquisition,

over research quality, academic integrity weakens rapidly.

13. Lack of Editorial Accountability

Strong journals clearly identify:

• editors,
• publishers,
• affiliations,
• and ethical policies.

Questionable journals often hide operational transparency.

If researchers cannot clearly identify who manages the journal, caution is necessary.

14. Unrealistic Acceptance Rates

Some journals appear to accept nearly every submission.

In real academia, rejection is normal.

A journal with unusually high acceptance rates may not be evaluating manuscripts rigorously.

15. Poorly Written Published Papers

Researchers should always read previously published articles before submitting.

Warning signs include:

• weak methodology,
• poor academic writing,
• irrelevant citations,
• repetitive themes,
• or shallow discussion sections.

Journal quality is reflected in the papers it publishes.

16. Hijacked Journal Identities

Some predatory operations imitate legitimate journals using:

• similar names,
• cloned websites,
• or misleading branding.

Researchers must carefully verify journal URLs and publisher authenticity.

17. Lack of Long-Term Archiving

Questionable journals often fail to maintain:

• digital preservation,
• DOI stability,
• or archival systems.

If a journal disappears, researchers may lose visibility and credibility for their work entirely.

18. Reviewer Fatigue and Automation

The publishing boom has overwhelmed legitimate peer review systems.

Some journals increasingly rely on:

• superficial reviews,
• automated screening,
• or underqualified reviewers.

This weakens publication standards significantly.

19. Pressure-Driven Publishing Culture

Predatory journals thrive because academia rewards output heavily.

Researchers facing:

• graduation pressure,
• promotion requirements,
• and publication quotas,

become vulnerable to unethical publishing shortcuts.

The problem is systemic not just individual.

20. The “Too Good to Be True” Feeling

Many experienced researchers recognize questionable journals instinctively.

If the process feels:

• unusually easy,
• overly flattering,
• commercially aggressive,
• or suspiciously fast,

that instinct matters.

Real academic publishing involves intellectual scrutiny.

And that scrutiny exists for a reason.

Why This Matters More in 2026

The modern publishing crisis is no longer simply about fake journals.

It is about blurred boundaries between:

• legitimate publishing,
• weak publishing,
• manipulated metrics,
• and industrial-scale academic output.

The recent wave of journal discontinuations across indexing databases demonstrates that researchers can no longer rely solely on indexing status as proof of quality.

Publishing literacy is now an essential research skill.

Final Thought

A publication should strengthen a researcher’s credibility — not threaten it.

In 2026, the smartest researchers will not simply ask:“Where can I publish fastest?”

They will ask:“Which journals genuinely protect research quality?”

Because academic publishing is not only about getting papers accepted.

It is about contributing work that deserves to be trusted, cited, and respected long after publication.

Published by Research Ramp, providing ethical academic writing support, expert editing, and application assistance through subject-matched professionals focused on clarity, credibility, and long-term academic development.