The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2411.08051 · v1 · pith:NSVFXXXN · submitted 2024-11-05 · cs.DL

What is wrong with MDPI: Is it a predator or a serious competitor?

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:NSVFXXXNrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.DL
keywords problemsmdpieditorjournalspredatorypublisherswhataddressed
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Hunt for predatory journals is based on binary division of the publishing world to legitime and predatory journals. This leads to difficulties in labeling publishers like MDPI with questionable practices. However, the root cause is not the publisher itself but the problems in the peer review system. These problems have created markets for the for-profit publishers shaking the understanding of conservative researchers and their belief about what is good science. In this paper, we analyze the problems via examples based on our own experience as author, reviewer, guest editor, associate editor, and editor-in-chief. We discuss how MDPI has addressed these problems.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.