Validating unethical behaviors
If you consider the author services market in this context, globally, it is huge.
A tweet out of the ALPSP meeting last week mentioned that there are over 7 million graduates per year in China.
In that context, how big a problem is the “predatory” author services market?
In fact, predatory practices can now be found in every aspect along the axis of publication, from the solicitation of papers and editorial board membership, pre-submission author services, Impact Factor look-alike companies, hijacked journals, hijacked author services, promises of peer review, and peer reviewer fraud itself.
Many of these unethical practices stem from a human condition of greed in commerce – where there is a buck to be made, there is someone who is willing to devise a scam to optimize that revenue stream.
While this has been going on for centuries, and is prevalent in many cultures, the publishing industry is built on “trust” (a topic that you have written about previously in ).
Authors do not only learn of standards and guidelines of appropriate conduct from what they hear and what they read, they learn from what behaviors they see in their environment and experience through active engagement with providers of services or resources.
One way to look at the author services market is to consider it to include all points of contact and influence for an author, whereby the integrity of authorship, the integrity of the output, and the integrity of the literature as a whole is at stake.