Predatory publishing: what authors, reviewers, and editors need to know.

The expansion of the Internet and the increasing pressure to provide new scientific content to the public as quickly as possible have led to rapid changes in the publishing industry. Recently, new publishing models have arisen, such as open access (content available to readers at no charge), hybrid (some combination of print and online content delivery), and early online access to print journal content. At BRN, we have adopted facets of all three of these models over the last few years by providing a fee-based open-access option to authors of already-accepted manuscripts, publishing some supplementary material online to allow authors to present more content, and publishing all manuscripts online ahead of print publication. As with all innovations, there are benefits and drawbacks to all of these, and the models continue to evolve. In this editorial, I will focus on one of the most controversial of the new models, open-access publishing. A relatively recent development, open-access publishing is designed to remove barriers, primarily financial, to the online access of peerreviewed scholarly research. As it has taken hold, the openaccess movement has significantly altered the conventional financial model of many journals. While journal owners historically relied entirely on journal subscriptions and content licenses or advertisements as their revenue base, most openaccess publishing options are fee based, meaning the author pays a fee to have an article published and made available to readers free of charge. The open-access model has been adopted, in some form, by many mainstream publishers such as Sage Publications, for example, the publisher of BRN. However, the availability of this new business model, along with the ease of entry into the field of digital publishing, has led to the launching of myriad new journals, each actively competing for authors and revenue. Some of these new journals, including those introduced by conventional commercial and professional society publishers to augment their journal portfolios, apply the rigorous peer-review practices and standards of scholarly excellence consistent with advances in professional disciplines such as nursing. However, across every academic field, professional discipline, and geographic jurisdiction, we are also seeing the emergence of a new species of publisher whose practices reveal little evidence of editorial or publishing quality. Instead, with profit as the driving force, these ‘‘predatory’’ publishers engage in a range of disturbingly unethical and unscholarly practices. Predatory Motivations and Practices