|Headquarters location||Wuhan, China|
|Key people||Huaibei Zhou|
|Publication types||Academic journals and books|
|Nonfiction topics||Life sciences, economics, chemistry, computer science, environmental sciences, engineering, medicine, physics, mathematics, social sciences|
|No. of employees||About 160|
Scientific Research Publishing (SCIRP) is an academic publisher of presumably peer-reviewedopen-accesselectronic journals, conference proceedings, and scientific anthologies of questionable quality. Although it has an address in southern California, in reality it is a "Chinese operation".
As of December 2014[update], it offered 244 English language open access journals in the areas of science, technology, business, economy, and medicine.
The company has been accused of being a predatory open access publisher and of using email spam to solicit papers for submission. In 2014 there was a mass resignation of the editorial board of one of the company's journals, with the outgoing Editor-in-Chief saying of the publisher "For them it was only about making money. We were simply their 'front'."
Open access type
According to its website, SCIRP publishes fee-based open-access journals (Gold OA). Payments are incurred per article published. Authors are permitted to archive their work (Green OA). Preprint, postprint, and the publisher's PDF version may be used. According to the society's website, journals published are fully open access, with reuse rights based on CC-BY or CC BY-NC.
SCIRP generated controversy in 2010 when it was found that its journals duplicated papers which had already been published elsewhere, without notification of or permission from the original author and of the copyright holder. Several of these publications have subsequently been retracted. Some of the journals had listed academics on their editorial boards without their permission or even knowledge, sometimes in fields very different from their own. In 2012, one of its journals, Advances in Pure Mathematics, accepted a paper written by a random text generator. The paper was not published, but only due to its author's unwillingness to pay the publication fee. The company has also been noted for the many unsolicited bulk emails it sends to academics about its journals. In 2013, the Open Journal of Pediatrics, a SCIRP journal, published a study which concluded that the number of babies born with thyroid problems in the western United States increased by 16 percent in 2011 compared to 2010, after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. The study has been criticized for not taking into account the fact that 2010 was a year with an unusually low number of births with thyroid problems. SCIRP refused to print a letter criticizing the study, but offered to publish it as an article for a charge.
The company has been included in a list of questionable open access publishers, according to Jeffrey Beall's criteria. Beall states that "This publisher exists for two reasons. First, it exists to exploit the author-pays Open Access model to generate revenue, and second, it serves as an easy place for foreign (chiefly Chinese) authors to publish overseas and increase their academic status." He acknowledges that its fees are relatively low, describing this as "a strategy that increases article submissions," and that "it has attracted some quality article submissions. Nevertheless, it is really a vanity press."
Further controversy was generated by a mass resignation of the editorial board of one of the company's journals, Advances in Anthropology, in 2014. According to the former editor-in-chief, Fatimah Jackson, it was motivated by failures to include the editorial board in the journal's review process, and by "consistent and flagrant unethical breaches by the editorial staff in China", for whom publishing the journal "was only about making money." According to Beall, this was the first mass resignation from an open-access journal.
- ^ abBeall, Jeffrey (2014-10-02). "An Editorial Board Mass-Resignation — from an Open-Access Journal". Scholarly Open Access. Archived from the original on 2014-10-18. Retrieved 2015-01-08.
- ^ abOransky, Ivan (2012-05-25). "Three more retractions for Vietnamese physicists who plagiarized a plagiarized paper". Retraction Watch. Retrieved 2015-01-13.
- ^ ab""Universe is Like Space Ship" and the problem with "predatory" science journals". Ottawa Citizen. 16 May 2015. Retrieved 13 August 2015.
- ^ abcdBeall, Jeffrey (April 2012). "Five Scholarly Open Access Publishers". The Charleston Advisor. 13 (4): 5–10. doi:10.5260/chara.13.4.5.
- ^Jeffrey Beall (2014-12-16). "The Chinese Publisher SCIRP (Scientific Research Publishing): A Publishing Empire Built on Junk Science". Archived from the original on 2014-12-27. Retrieved 2015-01-08.
- ^List of predatory publishers by scholarlyoa.com
- ^Beall, Jeffrey (2014-10-02). "An Editorial Board Mass-Resignation — from an Open-Access Journal". Scholarly Open Access. Archived from the original on 2015-04-11. Retrieved 2015-09-04.
- ^"Scientific Research Publishing". SHERPA. Retrieved 2013-05-28.
- ^Abrahams, Marc (2009-12-22). "Strange academic journals: Scam?". Improbable Research. Retrieved 2015-01-13.
- ^ abSanderson, Katharine (2010). "Two new journals copy the old". Nature. 463 (7278): 148. doi:10.1038/463148a. PMID 20075892.
- ^Doctorow, Cory (October 19, 2012). "Math journal accepts computer-generated nonsense paper". BoingBoing.
- ^Beall, Jeffrey (2014). "List of Predatory Publishers 2014". Archived from the original on 2014-04-22. Retrieved 2014-04-21.
- ^Beall, Jeffrey (2014). "Beall's list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers". Archived from the original on 2016-09-17. Retrieved 2014-04-21.
- ^Beall, Jeffrey (2009-12-01). "Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition)". Archived from the original on 2013-02-10. Retrieved 2013-03-03.
We evaluated the top 13 journals in trauma and orthopaedics by impact factor and looked at the longer-term effect regarding citations of their papers.
All 4951 papers published in these journals during 2007 and 2008 were reviewed and categorised by their type, subspecialty and super-specialty. All citations indexed through Google Scholar were reviewed to establish the rate of citation per paper at two, four and five years post-publication. The top five journals published a total of 1986 papers. Only three (0.15%) were on operative orthopaedic surgery and none were on trauma. Most (n = 1084, 54.5%) were about experimental basic science. Surgical papers had a lower rate of citation (2.18) at two years than basic science or clinical medical papers (4.68). However, by four years the rates were similar (26.57 for surgery, 30.35 for basic science/medical), which suggests that there is a considerable time lag before clinical surgical research has an impact.
We conclude that high impact journals do not address clinical research in surgery and when they do, there is a delay before such papers are cited. We suggest that a rate of citation at five years post-publication might be a more appropriate indicator of importance for papers in our specialty.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:414–19.