Predatory vs Legitimate Journals: 12 Warning Signs to Know
Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board — PhD academics, peer-reviewed journal editors and subject-matter specialists.
Last updated: October 2026 • Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board • Reading time: 6 minutes
A predatory journal takes publication fees without providing the editorial and peer review services it advertises. Publishing in one can waste a study, damage a researcher’s reputation and, for some institutions, count against promotion. This guide gives twelve warning signs, the independent checks that settle most doubts, and a short section for journal owners who want to show they are legitimate.
Key takeaways
- An international panel agreed a definition in 2019: predatory journals and publishers prioritise self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterised by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, lack of transparency, and aggressive, indiscriminate solicitation.
- A 2015 analysis estimated that the number of articles in such journals rose from about 53,000 in 2010 to about 420,000 in 2014.
- No single sign is proof. Look for a pattern, and verify claims in independent directories rather than on the journal’s own website.
- Being open access, charging an article processing charge (APC) or being new does not make a journal predatory.
Twelve warning signs
- Unsolicited, flattering invitations. Emails that praise a paper you have not written, or invite you to submit to a journal outside your field.
- An unfocused scope. One journal that claims to cover medicine, engineering and the humanities, or a title that does not match its content.
- Guaranteed or very fast acceptance. Credible journals cannot promise acceptance, and real peer review takes time.
- Vague or missing peer review. No description of who reviews, how many reviewers, or how decisions are made.
- An editorial board you cannot verify. Names without affiliations, people who have not agreed to serve, or board members with no relevant publications.
- Unclear fees. Charges not shown before submission, or revealed only after acceptance. A legitimate journal states its APC and any waiver policy up front.
- Indexing claims you cannot confirm. A journal may name databases it is not in. Check the database itself.
- Misleading metrics. Invented or unofficial "impact factors" from companies that are not Clarivate. Real Journal Impact Factors appear in the Journal Citation Reports.
- A name or ISSN that copies an established journal. Some fraudulent sites impersonate real journals (hijacked journals). Match the title, ISSN and URL against the ISSN Portal and the publisher’s own site.
- A careless or evasive website. Broken links, many language errors, no postal address or institutional contact, only a web form or free email address.
- Missing policies. No statement on copyright and licence, ethics, corrections and retractions, or long-term archiving.
- Claims of membership you cannot verify. Logos for COPE, OASPA or similar bodies that do not appear on the member lists.
Checks to run before you submit
Credible practice versus warning signs
| Area | Credible practice | Warning sign |
|---|---|---|
| Peer review | Described process, with reviewer reports and decisions by named editors | Promises of days-long review or guaranteed acceptance |
| Editorial board | Named experts with verifiable affiliations | Names without affiliations, or people who did not agree to serve |
| Fees | APC and waiver policy stated before submission | Charges revealed after acceptance |
| Indexing | Listed in the database’s own search, with the correct ISSN | Logos or claims that the database does not confirm |
If you run a journal: show you are legitimate
Authors will run the checks above on your journal. Clear policies, an active and verifiable board, honest metrics and accurate indexing claims are what pass them. DOAJ lists open access journals that meet its published criteria, and its listing is widely used by authors, libraries and funders as a signal of good practice.
Common questions
Are all open access journals predatory?
No. Many respected journals are open access. Judge the journal’s practices, not its access model.
Is a new journal automatically suspect?
No. A new journal may lack indexing because it has not yet qualified, which is different from claiming indexing it does not have. Check what it actually states and whether the claims hold.
What if I have already submitted to a journal I now doubt?
Withdraw in writing before publication, keep copies of the correspondence, and ask your library or research office for advice. If the article is already published, speak to your institution before taking further action.
NeucitePress services for journal owners
For journals that want their practices to hold up to the checks above. Database inclusion is decided by each database and is never promised.
Journal-specific policies aligned with COPE and ICMJE, editorial board renewal, integrity screening, an ethics case retainer, training and an annual compliance review.
Assessment against every DOAJ criterion, fixes with templates, and preparation and submission of the application. DOAJ charges nothing to apply; this is our preparation fee. Inclusion is DOAJ’s decision.
A conflict-screened reviewer shortlist for each submission, approved by your editor, then invitations, reminders and replacements managed in your OJS workflow, with every step logged.
Sources
- Grudniewicz et al., Predatory journals: no definition, no defence, Nature (2019)
- Shen and Björk, ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics, BMC Medicine (2015)
- Think. Check. Submit.
- DOAJ, Guide to applying and inclusion criteria
- ISSN Portal
- COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME, Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
