A Multidisciplinary Study of Faculty Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Predatory Publishing

INTRODUCTION Not enough is known about what faculty understand about predatory journals, how they learn about them, and how they feel about them, which has led to insufficient education and guidance on the phenomenon. METHODS A census survey was sent to all publishing university faculty at a mid-sized doctoral granting university and received 109 responses. The survey covered faculty professional history, departmental culture and environment, criteria for journal selection, and knowledge of and experiences with predatory journals. RESULTS Almost all faculty had at least heard of predatory publishing and believed it to be a problem. Faculty reported that, most of the time, they learned about it through colleagues and/or the literature in their field. Yet, faculty expressed uncertainty about the impact predatory journals have on their field and expressed hesitance in penalizing colleagues for publishing in them. DISCUSSION Faculty understanding of predatory journals—and fraudulent publishing overall—may be too basic for efficient application in complex situations such as exploring new publication opportunities and evaluating scholarship. This leads to incongruencies between faculty values and the courses of action they pursue. CONCLUSION It is important to form a fuller picture of faculty relationships with fraudulent publishing in order to respond appropriately to their needs. The results from this study inform how the University Libraries might work with colleges and other entities on campus to provide early and ongoing professional development.