We set out to create an openly accessible, transparent evaluation tool that engages with the nuance of publishing circumstances and creates a clear record of the assessment. Without redefining or seeking to categorize journals, we hope to provide information in a format that allows authors to make considered choices and librarians to record the efforts of labor they likely already engage in. Working with the inherent humor of meta-analysis, we created Reviews: The Journal of Journal Reviews (RJJR). RJJR will publish nuanced, context-centered reviews of scholarly journals based on available, observable evidence. The “Journal Reviews”—peer-reviewed evaluations of journals across disciplines, subscription models, and regions—will offer researchers an alternative tool for evaluating unfamiliar publications while also modeling contextual evaluation. We are dedicated to the process of journal evaluation as an educational tool as well as a resource for the community.
Scholarly Communication | Scholarly Publishing
Schultz, T Sterman, L Neds-Fox, J Ruen, M Selman, B & Towery, S. (2023, 5 9). The Notion and Assessment of ‘Predatory’ in Scholarly Publishing. The Journal of Electronic Publishing 26(1) doi: 10.3998/jep.3681
© The Authors, shared by permission.