On predatory journals, and the need for academic honesty in public conversations

-
Kanhaiya Kumar has recently come under fire for publishing in a predatory journal to fulfil his PhD requirements. Since publishing, and hence predatory publishing, are academic concepts, I find it important to clarify some things regarding this issue.

Predatory publishing is a very problematic practice which erodes quality of research. Predatory publishing spreads misinformation and puts extra burden on ethical researchers to check, contest and clarify the published misconceptions. If a researcher, even unknowingly and in good faith, publishes articles in predatory journals, they are complicit in an exaggeration of the certainty of those results. I'd like to place on record my categorical disapproval of predatory publishing, as I have also done in the past (less dispassionately, I must admit).

Having said that, it is also clear that defining an unethical intent to publish in a predatory journal is not straightforward (see Grudniewicz et al., 2019, for instance). A few relevant points:
  • Several journals may be placed in the predatory bracket, simply because they lack resources to afford proper quality control. Thus a journal may be predatory intentionally or unintentionally.
  • Several researchers may publish in a journal, simply because the researcher is not aware of the predatory nature of the journal. Thus a researcher may publish in a predatory journal intentionally or unintentionally.
  • Deciding whether a journal is predatory or not is, in itself, a very complicated task. This is evident, for eg., from the fact that UGC has only recently come up with a clear, definitive list. It is not a matter of incompetence or lack of motivation. The dynamic nature of research prohibits a universal and final definition. The lists will need to be updated regularly, and the efforts to catch unethical intents will have to be matched, both in funding and in awareness, by those on the right side of things.

I am reminded of an Indian scientist who has published in a predatory journal but has also (post-publication) received a national award by the Government for his work. However, one cannot assume that the scientist published in the predatory journal knowing the full implications of the submission, and hence one must not assume that he is unethical. Calling out specific individuals for their articles in predatory journals requires several checks. It requires clear evidence that the researcher published in the predatory journal with the intent of bypassing quality checks.

In fact, I worry that a detailed roster of everyone who has ever published in a predatory journal would reflect deep issues with Indian academia and what (and who) we hold with high regard. Does this reflect more on Indian academia, or on how complicated the matter of predatory publishing is? One may argue for both cases. With time, I have grown to lean towards the latter.

It would certainly help if there were frequent training programs to raise awareness among researchers regarding this issue. In my opinion, there is almost no systemic support to enable researchers to identify predatory journals, even though India has become a globally recognised "hub" of predatory publishing houses. In such a situation, "famous" examples like Kanhaiya Kumar are helpful to raise awareness about the issue, but are they justified?

When academic issues become a matter of public concern, clarifications by academics are required and appreciated. However, academics must keep their audience in mind too. The general public cannot be expected to understand the nuances and the finer complications of academic issues. Individuals or media houses who have no previous background on the problem of predatory publishing would likely jump to the erroneous conclusion that publishing in a predatory journal is always intentional and unethical. That simply isn't true.

 More importantly, the layman may not have the intellectual resolution to inspect issues at such close quarters. For academics, it is our duty to not assume or extrapolate based on our ideologies. It is our duty, not simply because we earn our bread and butter through this profession, but because we have received training to inspect, re-inspect, question, re-question, verify, re-verify, and not "believe" until all reasonable doubt has been eliminated. An exaggeration of the certainty of any allegation betrays the same principles we would like to hold academic publishing accountable to. And when these matters impact a national narrative, the need for caution is amplified.

-----

It is my request that this post not be viewed as:
  • defending Kanhaiya Kumar's publication -- if he has intentionally published in a predatory journal, I hope he receives the penalty for it; a political candidate should not receive any special "considerations" or exemptions from rules, nor should he/she be subjected to supra-normal standards only to create an example;
  • discouraging academics to contribute to public conversations -- in fact, I think it is necessary to bring more academic honesty and rigour into public conversations.

-----


For email subscriptions to such posts:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Darwin's Lost World - Part II

-
<< Previous page So what do we (did Darwin) know by now (then) ? That living creatures from the very very ancient past (we're talking in terms of millions of years) were often found preserved in the rock record. That we could make out some things about the past environments from these fossils. Fossils showed specific associations: you saw only certain types and groups of fossils in certain suites of rocks (belonging to different periods of geological time). There came a dead end at the base of the Cambrian. Scientists like to call this the Cambrian Explosion today, but back then, many of them were more inclined to dismiss this either as a figment of the imagination of relatively smaller body of researchers, or simply, incomplete/inaccurate science. That the Creator had made us all, was the popular view. 3 theories emerged to explain why we see the Cambrian Explosion (if it even is a real thing!): Charles Lyell Interestingly, it is said that Lyell was...
Read more

On Darwin's Lost World

-
Image
Martin Brasier was a prolific paleontologist. And from what little I know of him, he must have been a pretty cool guy. I recently read his book "Darwin's Lost World" and it was definitely one of the better decisions of my life. On Darwin Thankfully, even the most plebeian of science curricula finds it worthwhile to describe Charles Darwin's scientific accomplishments. To me, all through childhood, Darwin represented my superiority to the apes. When someone said Darwin, I would get a mental picture of an ape gradually turning human. That's an overly simplistic picture, but then again, there is so much to learn about everything  that one doesn't quite know where to start. Source The rock record is the only thing that can give us a picture of the ancient Earth. Most other branches of science can tell you what the Earth is like, and why it is the way it is. But it was Geology that first told us what the Earth was  like, and bits of why it w...
Read more

What is ENSO? Page 2 - SSTs and trade winds

-
Image
  This is Page 2 of the sub-series "What is ENSO?". If you haven't already, please read Page 1 first. For convenience, keep that page open in a different tab. = = = What is ENSO? In the previous post , we learnt to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperature anomalies . In this post, I'm going to answer a question that no one really asked ―  What if I wanted to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) instead? What if, for no good reason but because I felt like it, I wanted to do away with the "anomalies" bit? Looking at SSTs instead of SST anomalies makes matters unnecessarily complicated, but we're going to do it anyway because it also teaches us a lot. In the image below, I've plotted SSTs from the HadISST dataset. These are mean SSTs for the months of December, January and February (DJF) over all years from 1872-2009. Why did we select the months of DJF? Because ENSO events can be seen...
Read more