Abstract
To date, limited studies have examined the citations of articles published in predatory journals, and none appears to have been done in marketing. Using Google Scholar (GS) as a citation source, this study aims to examine the extent of citations of (articles published in) 10 predatory marketing journals. Citation analyses indicate that the most cited predatory marketing journal gathered 6296 citations since it was first published in 2008. Four of the 10 predatory journals gathered over 732 citations each since they were launched (i.e., highly cited). Three other journals were cited between 147 and 732 times (i.e., moderately cited). The three remaining journals received below 147 citations each (i.e., trivially cited). Findings show that the 1246 articles published in these 10 predatory journals, and which are visible to GS, received 10,935 citations, with 8.776 citations per paper. About 11.624% of these 1246 articles were cited 13 times or more. The most cited article received 217 citations, of which 21 are from journals indexed in Clarivate Analytics’ Social Sciences Citation Index. Based on these findings, this study concludes that the conventional marketing literature has been already contaminated by predatory marketing journals.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
02 December 2020
In the original publication of the article, the following reference was published incorrectly.
References
Asadi, A., Rahbar, N., Asadi, M., Asadi, F., & Paji, K. K. (2017). Online-based approaches to identify real journals and publishers from hijacked ones. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9747-9.
Bagues, M., Sylos-Labini, M., & Zinovyeva, N. (2019). A walk on the wild side: ‘Predatory’ journals and information asymmetries in scientific evaluations. Research Policy, 48(2), 462–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.013.
Bailey, C. D., Hair, J. F., Hermanson, D. R., & Crittenden, V. L. (2012). Marketing academics' perceptions of the peer review process. Marketing Education Review, 22(3), 263–278. https://doi.org/10.2753/MER1052-8008220306.
Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (2003). The structural influence of marketing journals: A citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.2.123.18610.
Beall, J. (2012a). Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature, 489(7415), 179. https://doi.org/10.1038/489179a.
Beall, J. (2012b). Criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers. 2nd edition. https://scholarlyoa.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/criteria-2012-2.pdf. Accessed 2 September 2020.
Beall, J. (2016). Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 98(2), 77–79. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2016.0056.
Biagioli, M., Kenney, M., Martin, B., & Walsh, J. P. (2019). Academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming: A reassessment. Research Policy, 48(2), 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.025.
Björk, B. C., Kanto-Karvonen, S., & Harviainen, J. T. (2020). How frequently are articles in predatory open access journals cited. Publications, 8(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8020017.
Clark, A. M., & Thompson, D. R. (2017). Five (bad) reasons to publish your research in predatory journals. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73(11), 2499–2501. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13090.
Copiello, S., & Bonifaci, P. (2019). ResearchGate Score, full-text research items, and full-text reads: A follow-up study. Scientometrics, 119(2), 1255–1262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03063-6.
Cukier, S., Helal, L., Rice, D. B., Pupkaite, J., Ahmadzai, N., Wilson, M., et al. (2020). Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: A systematic review. BMC Medicine, 18, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01566-1.
Cukier, S., Lalu, M., Bryson, G. L., Cobey, K. D., Grudniewicz, A., & Moher, D. (2020). Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: A modified Delphi consensus process. BMJ Open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035561.
Dadkhah, M., & Bianciardi, G. (2016). Ranking predatory journals: Solve the problem instead of removing it! Advanced Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 6(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.15171/apb.2016.001.
Dadkhah, M., & Darbani, S. M. (2016). What can authors do for the papers they published in predatory journals? Polskie Archiwum Medycyny Wewnetrznej, 126(7–8), 574–575. https://doi.org/10.20452/pamw.3485.
Demir, S. B. (2018). Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why? Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1296–1311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008.
Dobusch, L., & Heimstädt, M. (2019). Predatory publishing in management research: A call for open peer review. Management Learning, 50(5), 607–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507619878820.
Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1990). Introduction to informetrics: Quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science. Elsevier Science Publishers.
Eisend, M., & Lehmann, D. R. (2016). Assessing the enduring impact of influential papers. Marketing Letters, 27(1), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9319-9.
Eriksson, S., & Helgesson, G. (2017). The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 20(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-016-9740-3.
Frandsen, T. F. (2017). Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers. Scientometrics, 113(3), 1513–1528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2520-x.
Furnham, A. (2020). What I have learned from my Google Scholar and h-index. Scientometrics, 122(2), 1249–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03316-4.
Golder, P. N., & Jap, S. D. (2020). Launching the idea corners section of marketing letters. Marketing Letters. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-020-09515-x.
Grudniewicz, A., Moher, D., Cobey, K. D., Bryson, G. L., Cukier, S., Allen, K., et al. (2019). Predatory journals: No definition, no defence. Nature, 576, 210–212. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y.
Halevi, G., Moed, H., & Bar-Ilan, J. (2017). Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 823–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.005.
Harzing, A. W. (2020). Publish or Perish [computer program] (version 7.26.2899). Tarma Software Research Pty Limited.
Harzing, A. W., & Adler, N. J. (2016). Disseminating knowledge: From potential to reality—new open-access journals collide with convention. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0373.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
Hofacker, C. F., Gleim, M. R., & Lawson, S. J. (2009). Revealed reader preference for marketing journals. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0124-y.
Hubbard, R., Norman, A. T., & Parsa, R. A. (2010). Marketing's “Oscars”: A citation analysis of award-winning articles. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28(5), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501011066555.
Jobber, D., & Simpson, P. (1988). A citation analysis of selected marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 5(2), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(88)90065-1.
Kakamad, F. H., Mohammed, S. H., Najar, K. A., Qadr, G. A., Ahmed, J. O., Mohammed, K. K., et al. (2020). Kscien's list; A new strategy to discourage predatory journals and publishers. International Journal of Surgery Open, 23, 54–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijso.2019.11.001.
Koerber, A., Starkey, J. C., Ardon-Dryer, K., Cummins, R. G., Eko, L., & Kee, K. F. (2020). A qualitative content analysis of watchlists vs safelists: How do they address the issue of predatory publishing? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(6), 102236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102236.
Kurt, S. (2018). Why do authors publish in predatory journals? Learned Publishing, 31(2), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1150.
Lalu, M. M., Shamseer, L., Cobey, K. D., & Moher, D. (2017). How stakeholders can respond to the rise of predatory journals. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(12), 852–855. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0257-4.
Li, S., Sivadas, E., & Johnson, M. S. (2015). Explaining article influence: Capturing article citability and its dynamic effects. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 52–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0392-7.
Linacre, S. (2019). The Journal Blacklist surpasses the 12,000 journals listed mark. The Source. Cabells Scholarly Analytics. https://blog.cabells.com/2019/10/02/the-journal-blacklist-surpasses-the-12000-journals-listed-mark/. Accessed 4 June 2020.
Linacre, S. (2020). Cabells’ top 7 palpable points about predatory publishing practices. The Source. Cabells Scholarly Analytics.https://blog.cabells.com/2020/07/15/cabells-top-7-palpable-points-about-predatory-publishing-practices/. Accessed 12 September 2020.
Linacre, S., Bisaccio, M., & Earle, L. (2019). Publishing in an environment of predation: The many things you really wanted to know, but did not know how to ask. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 26(2), 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2019.1603423.
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002.
McLeod, A., Savage, A., & Simkin, M. G. (2018). The ethics of predatory journals. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3419-9.
Memon, A. R. (2018a). Predatory journals spamming for publications: What should researchers do? Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(5), 1617–1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9955-6.
Memon, A. R. (2018). How to respond to and what to do for papers published in predatory journals. Science Editing, 5(2), 146–149. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.140.
Memon, A. R. (2019). Revisiting the term predatory open access publishing. Journal of Korean Medical Science. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e99.
Moussa, S. (2019). Is Microsoft Academic a viable citation source for ranking marketing journals? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 71(5), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-03-2019-0070.
Moussa, S., & Touzani, M. (2010). Ranking marketing journals using the Google Scholar-based hg-index. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.10.001.
Nicholson, D. R. (2017). Predatory publishing practices: Is there life after Beall's list? LIBRES: Library & Information Science Research Electronic Journal, 27(2), 53–70.
Nwagwu, W. E., & Ojemeni, O. (2015). Penetration of Nigerian predatory biomedical open access journals 2007–2012: A bibliometric study. Learned Publishing, 28(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150105.
Oermann, M. H., Nicoll, L. H., Carter-Templeton, H., Woodward, A., Kidayi, P. L., Neal, L. B., et al. (2019). Citations of articles in predatory nursing journals. Nursing Outlook, 67(6), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2019.05.001.
Perlin, M. S., Imasato, T., & Borenstein, D. (2018). Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study. Scientometrics, 116(1), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2750-6.
Saad, G. (2006). Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69(1), 117–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0142-9.
Saad, G. (2010). Applying the h-index in exploring bibliometric properties of elite marketing scholars. Scientometrics, 83(2), 423–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0069-z.
Shen, C., & Björk, B. C. (2015). ‘Predatory’open access: A longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Medicine, 13(1), 230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2.
Siler, K. (2020). Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24339.
Small, H. (1982). Citation context analysis. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 287–310). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Sorokowski, P., Kulczycki, E., Sorokowska, A., & Pisanski, K. (2017). Predatory journals recruit fake editor. Nature News, 543(7646), 481–483. https://doi.org/10.1038/543481a.
Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.171.
Stremersch, S., Camacho, N., Vanneste, S., & Verniers, I. (2015). Unraveling scientific impact: Citation types in marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2014.09.004.
Strielkowski, W. (2017). Predatory journals: Beall's List is missed. Nature, 544(7651), 416–416. https://doi.org/10.1038/544416b.
Sudhir, K. (2018). Introducing a new section—marketing science: Frontiers. Marketing Science, 37(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2018.1091.
Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2020). Cabell’s International publishing blacklist: An interview with Kathleen Berryman. Journal of Radical Librarianship, 6, 16–23.
Truth, F. (2012). Pay big to publish fast: Academic journal rackets. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 10(2), 54–105.
Wallace, F. H., & Perri, T. J. (2018). Economists behaving badly: Publications in predatory journals. Scientometrics, 115(2), 749–766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2690-1.
Xia, J., Harmon, J. L., Connolly, K. G., Donnelly, R. M., Anderson, M. R., & Howard, H. A. (2015). Who publishes in “predatory” journals? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1406–1417. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23265.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and helpful suggestions. The author is also indebted to Imen Bouyahi for her feedback on an early version of this manuscript.
Funding
The author received no financial support for this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares no potential conflicts of interest regarding this paper.
Additional information
The original online version of this article was revised: In the original publication of the article, the reference to Teixeira da Silva 2020 was incorrectly published.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moussa, S. Citation contagion: a citation analysis of selected predatory marketing journals. Scientometrics 126, 485–506 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03729-6
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03729-6