Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Journey Through the Publishing Minefield: Navigating Trust in a Digital Age
Back when I was a PhD candidate, the finish line was clear: to graduate, I had to publish.
I remember sitting at my desk, manuscript ready, but facing an ethical crossroads. My adviser recommended Scopus-indexed journals, but the publication fees? They were way beyond my budget. Although my university would refund the expenses once the paper was published, I was stuck. I didn't have the cash up front, and I was chasing a graduation deadline. I was out of time.
As I searched, the "Journal Jungle" started closing in. My inbox had these invitations from International Journals promising: “Acceptance of manuscript within a couple of days!” I felt doubt, thinking… Which of these can I actually trust? Is a journal prestigious, or just expensive? Is their peer review rigorous, or just a rubber stamp?
In the rush to build a career and tick a box for graduation, it’s so easy to lose sight of why we do this in the first place: to contribute to the truth.
The Trust Paradox: The Reputation and the Integrity
Trust was a prerequisite for scholarly publishing. Today, it’s a calculation. Often decide between:
Career Side (Prestige Markers): These are Impact Factor, journal rankings, and high visibility. These are the measures that are often required by tenure-track committees and graduation requirements.
"Trust" Markers (The Truth Side): These form the pillars of the science of honesty, ethical transparency and a strict review by peers.
This tension is not only at the personal level, but it is also at the global level. Peer review is the most trusted method of research, according to an international survey of more than 3,600 researchers conducted.
Nevertheless, the research results have one major paradox: even when researchers attach importance to the soundness of argument and the credibility of data, they still largely resort to relying on journal indices as one of their major shortcuts when deciding whether a resource is credible enough to be read, cited, or published.
The "Short-Cut" Trap
Looking back, under pressure, I shifted toward expedited publication and low-cost entry as my primary considerations. I assumed that if a journal looked "International" and was affordable, it was a safe shortcut to graduation.
The academic community is now seeing the consequences of these shortcuts through the Wiley-Hindawi crisis. Systemic failures involving paper mills, entities using fabricated data to bypass quality controls, led to over 11,300 retractions and the closure of 19 journals. In a landscape of paper mills and "AI Slop" (unverified, machine-generated content), these shortcuts have become career-killing traps that risk the foundation of a professional portfolio.
Philippine Gatekeepers: Ethical Anchor
In the Philippines, research integrity is reinforced by Ethics Review Committees (ERCs) and rigorous instrument validation. ERCs act as ethical anchors by scrutinizing methodology, while validation, involving internal and external experts, checks data for technical accuracy and local relevance.
This process provides the structural trust necessary to withstand the threats of AI slop and paper mills. For the researcher, these safeguards are not bureaucratic hurdles but career insurance. Aligning with an ERC is a strategic move toward global visibility; top-tier journals often treat institutional ethical clearance as an "ethical passport", without which a manuscript may be disqualified immediately.
Lessons Learned: Surviving the Journal Jungle
Reflecting on my journey from a PhD student to a more experienced researcher, what I have found out is that the shortcuts we make nowadays frequently become the retractions we are going to make in the future. These are the main realities that I have learned in this publishing mine field:
- Integrity is a Calculated Investment, not a Fee: The pressure to graduate and limited budgets often make "expedited" or low-cost journals tempting. However, the Wiley-Hindawi crisis taught us the lesson of a rushed publication that may place an indelible mark on your portfolio. It is not just getting published that makes one become a real success, but being retraction-proof.
- Validation Process: In an era where "AI slop" and automated paper mills can churn out generic content in seconds, the Philippine Validation Process stands as a critical line of defense. This isn't just about checking boxes; it is a human audit that verifies the soul of your research.
Navigating the Journal Jungle: Recommendations
The "Journal Jungle" is a reality of modern academia, but it doesn't have to be a trap. My experience taught me that while the pressure to graduate is temporary, the mark of our integrity on the scientific record is permanent.
We are at a crossroads where the "handshake" of trust is being replaced by algorithms and verification tools. However, by leaning into our local safeguards, like the Philippine Ethics Review Committees (ERCs) and validation process, we move from a state of paralyzing doubt to one of professional confidence. We learn that trust is not something we should simply "assume" based on an Impact Factor; it is something we verify through a rigorous process of ethical conduct and transparent authorship.
For Academic Institutions: Strengthening the Foundation
- Adviser Training: Institutional integrity begins at the adviser’s desk. Schools must ensure advisers can identify predatory journals and paper mill warning signs.
- Tier Up with Global Organizations: Schools may consider joining professional bodies like the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE) to access global best practices and ethical guidelines.
- Internal Peer-Review Panels: Establish "mock peer review" boards to evaluate papers for technical rigor before they are submitted internationally.
- Literacy on Publishing Risks: Educate faculty and students on systemic failures, "AI slop", and how paper mills operate.
Keywords
Research Integrity Predatory Publishing Ethics Review Committee (ERC) Instrument Validation Paper Mills AI Slop
Dr. Jeanne Alejo-Abitago, from the Philippines, holds a Bachelor of Science in Criminology from the University of Southern Mindanao, and a master's and Doctor of Philosophy in Criminal Justice with a criminology specialization from the University of Mindanao. She currently serves the Philippine National Police Davao City Police Office as Women’s and Children Protection Desk Investigator. She is also a faculty member at St. Peter’s College of Toril's Criminology Department and a guest lecturer at the University of Mindanao. Her editorial work includes the Public Administration Research team with the Canadian Center of Science and Education (partnered with ResearchGate) and the International Journal of Advanced Research. She's been awarded by Academic Business Current Data Index for reviewing journals and is a certified reviewer with ReviewersCredits, HQ based in Berlin, Germany (ID 256384). Additionally, she's an active member of the Professional Criminologist Association of the Philippines, International Association of Crime Analysts, the Eastern Regional Organization for Public Administration, and the Asian Council of Science Editors, with her membership sponsored by ScienceAlert. Through her active involvement in practice and academia, alongside her research publication and editorial contributions, she is dedicated to promoting research and scholarly publishing integrity.
View All Posts by Jeanne Alejo-AbitagoDisclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.
