Thanks for posting! I briefly skimmed something about this issue on social media and forgot to return to it. Appreciate your take and added context, because I had no idea who these people are. I've been developing an interest in research, too - are there any journals that you recommend following?
Lots of the papers in Animals can be taken seriously, but a good look at the references helps because some of the references are god-awful and some reviewer has passed them. Even though Nature and Science are as predatory as the next, they do take themselves and their reputation seriously enough that they take things a little more seriously. It's awful at the moment. I was just preparing a post for the morning ironically in which I mention a site called Retraction Watch which gives a bit of a nerdy insight into some of the problems. They report that Taylor & Francis papers will now have an 'under review' label to let you know if the research has been questioned, for instance. (https://retractionwatch.com/2024/09/25/publisher-adds-temporary-online-notifications-to-articles-under-investigation/)
For the dog stuff, I like the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour stuff. The Journal of Applied Animal Behaviour Science can be as temperamental as Animals unfortunately. It does make it really hard to find research that is reliable or doesn't benefit from a few people's thoughts who were not involved. Royal Society Publishing is more robust, though it's not specifically about animals or companions. I often find, if I come across a journal and I like an article in it, that a quick search for the journal name + the terms 'predatory publishing' will thow up any concerns quite quickly.
Thanks for posting! I briefly skimmed something about this issue on social media and forgot to return to it. Appreciate your take and added context, because I had no idea who these people are. I've been developing an interest in research, too - are there any journals that you recommend following?
Lots of the papers in Animals can be taken seriously, but a good look at the references helps because some of the references are god-awful and some reviewer has passed them. Even though Nature and Science are as predatory as the next, they do take themselves and their reputation seriously enough that they take things a little more seriously. It's awful at the moment. I was just preparing a post for the morning ironically in which I mention a site called Retraction Watch which gives a bit of a nerdy insight into some of the problems. They report that Taylor & Francis papers will now have an 'under review' label to let you know if the research has been questioned, for instance. (https://retractionwatch.com/2024/09/25/publisher-adds-temporary-online-notifications-to-articles-under-investigation/)
For the dog stuff, I like the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour stuff. The Journal of Applied Animal Behaviour Science can be as temperamental as Animals unfortunately. It does make it really hard to find research that is reliable or doesn't benefit from a few people's thoughts who were not involved. Royal Society Publishing is more robust, though it's not specifically about animals or companions. I often find, if I come across a journal and I like an article in it, that a quick search for the journal name + the terms 'predatory publishing' will thow up any concerns quite quickly.