In recent years, the number of journals that publish articles without considering their scientific merit, but simply because the author has paid a fee, has expanded dramatically. The scientific community refers to these journals as predatory journals. Various lists of predatory journals exist, such as the Beall's List (https://beallslist.net/), and it is generally accepted that there are several thousand such publications. This suggests that a predatory publishing industry now exists. We regard predatory journals as problematic because of the ways in which they manipulate researchers, in particular, young and unexperienced ones (Xia et al., 2015). In return for a fee, which may be quite substantial, these journals accept research without peer review, valuing their profit over scholarship or any attempt to generate valid knowledge transparently. Nevertheless, the business model works, in large part because these journals meet an urgent and unfulfilled need: to get research published in journals. Because non-predatory journals are unable or unwilling to accept more than a small fraction of the vast numbers of research papers being written, the predatory journal industry has a guaranteed supply of willing authors. These authors argue quite reasonably that they must, somehow, publish their papers within a necessarily limited period to hold on to their jobs. As editors, we often receive entreating emails from authors who ask how much they need to pay to get their article accepted, pointing out that if they do not get it published, they will lose their jobs. Agencies also intermediate this process, offering us large numbers of papers for publication, with payment (to our personal bank accounts) of substantial fees if we can waive the review process and guarantee publication in the next issue. In this editorial, we discuss this challenge and reflect on ways in which the information systems research community can deal with it. Predatory journals target all researchers. It is quite common that shortly after a reputable journal has accepted your article, you will get an email that praises you to the skies and invites you to submit more of your excellent work to Journal X, for publication in the next issue. Fees are generally not mentioned at this stage. Authors who are not in the position of just having had a paper accepted may also find that their contact details have been harvested and so they too are on the receiving end of these seductive invitations. Young and aspiring researchers who are under enormous pressure to establish a record of published research are particularly vulnerable. With an increasing focus on quantifiable and measurable achievements to reach and retain academic promotions, predatory journals may for them be the only option. Their supervisors or senior colleagues will also be burdened to evaluate outlets they know little about and give the right advice. The pressure on authors created by reputable journals to produce high-quality research plays a vital role in promoting state-of-the-art research activities within a research field and acts as a singular motivation for scholars. However, the increasing focus on counting the number of publications, as well as the associated h-index, may influence scholarship negatively (cf. Davison & Bjørn-Andersen, 2019). Not only may researchers feel that the quick publication of research demonstrates productivity and that this is inherently a good thing, but also they may choose not to develop more long term and significant research contributions. If numbers are all that matters, other questionable and unhealthy behaviours may emerge, for example, the tendency to publish in predatory journals if reputable journals are out of reach. We note that as of December 2019, the AIS has over 4,800 members. Much as the AIS might like otherwise, not all IS academics are members: indeed, many join only because they need to attend an AIS conference. Thus, the total DOI: 10.1111/isj.12289

中文翻译：

---

掠夺性期刊：不健康的出版或消亡游戏的标志？

近年来，不考虑其科学价值而仅仅因为作者付费而发表文章的期刊数量急剧增加。科学界将这些期刊称为掠夺性期刊。存在各种掠夺性期刊列表，例如 Beall's List (https://beallslist.net/)，并且普遍认为有数千种此类出版物。这表明现在存在掠夺性出版业。我们认为掠夺性期刊存在问题，因为它们操纵研究人员的方式，特别是年轻和没有经验的研究人员（Xia 等，2015）。作为回报，可能相当可观的费用，这些期刊接受没有同行评审的研究，重视他们的利润而不是奖学金或任何透明地产生有效知识的尝试。然而，这种商业模式之所以奏效，很大程度上是因为这些期刊满足了一个紧迫且未得到满足的需求：将研究成果发表在期刊上。由于非掠夺性期刊无法或不愿意接受大量正在撰写的研究论文中的一小部分，因此掠夺性期刊行业有保证的愿意作者的供应。这些作者相当合理地辩称，他们必须以某种方式在必要的有限时间内发表论文以保住工作。作为编辑，我们经常收到作者的恳求电子邮件，他们询问他们需要支付多少钱才能让他们的文章被接受，并指出如果他们不发表，他们将失去工作。机构也在这个过程中间，为我们提供大量的论文发表，如果我们可以免除审核流程并保证在下一期中出版，则可以（向我们的个人银行账户）支付大量费用。在这篇社论中，我们讨论了这一挑战并反思了信息系统研究界可以应对的方式。掠夺性期刊针对所有研究人员。很常见的情况是，在知名期刊接受您的文章后不久，您会收到一封电子邮件，上面夸奖您，并邀请您向 Journal X 提交更多优秀作品，以便在下一期发表。在此阶段一般不提及费用。那些不是刚刚接受论文的作者也可能会发现他们的联系方式已被收集，因此他们也收到了这些诱人的邀请。面临着建立已发表研究记录的巨大压力的年轻和有抱负的研究人员尤其容易受到伤害。随着越来越多地关注可量化和可衡量的成就以达到和保持学术晋升，掠夺性期刊可能是他们唯一的选择。他们的主管或高级同事也将有负担评估他们知之甚少的网点并提供正确的建议。知名期刊对作者施加的产生高质量研究的压力在促进研究领域内最先进的研究活动方面发挥着至关重要的作用，并成为学者的唯一动力。然而，越来越关注计算出版物数量以及相关的 h 指数，可能会对学术产生负面影响（参见戴维森和比约恩-安德森，2019）。研究人员不仅可能会认为研究的快速发表展示了生产力，这本身就是一件好事，而且他们可能会选择不进行更长期和更重要的研究贡献。如果数字才是最重要的，那么可能会出现其他有问题和不健康的行为，例如，如果无法获得信誉良好的期刊，则倾向于在掠夺性期刊上发表文章。我们注意到，截至 2019 年 12 月，AIS 拥有超过 4,800 名成员。就像 AIS 可能不喜欢的那样，并非所有的 IS 学者都是成员：事实上，许多人加入只是因为他们需要参加 AIS 会议。因此，总 DOI：10.1111/isj.12289 但他们也可能选择不进行更长期和更重要的研究贡献。如果数字才是最重要的，那么可能会出现其他有问题和不健康的行为，例如，如果信誉良好的期刊遥不可及，则倾向于在掠夺性期刊上发表文章。我们注意到，截至 2019 年 12 月，AIS 拥有超过 4,800 名成员。就像 AIS 可能不喜欢的那样，并非所有的 IS 学者都是成员：事实上，许多人加入只是因为他们需要参加 AIS 会议。因此，总 DOI：10.1111/isj.12289 但他们也可能选择不进行更长期和重大的研究贡献。如果数字才是最重要的，那么可能会出现其他有问题和不健康的行为，例如，如果信誉良好的期刊遥不可及，则倾向于在掠夺性期刊上发表文章。我们注意到，截至 2019 年 12 月，AIS 拥有超过 4,800 名成员。就像 AIS 可能不喜欢的那样，并非所有的 IS 学者都是成员：事实上，许多人加入只是因为他们需要参加 AIS 会议。因此，总 DOI：10.1111/isj.12289 并非所有 IS 学者都是会员：事实上，许多人加入只是因为他们需要参加 AIS 会议。因此，总 DOI：10.1111/isj.12289 并非所有 IS 学者都是会员：事实上，许多人加入只是因为他们需要参加 AIS 会议。因此，总 DOI：10.1111/isj.12289