“Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate practices.”
Consensus definition (Grudniewicz, Moher, Cobey, et al, 2019)
A Whitelist is a list of journals, publishers, companies or entities that are considered to be acceptable or trustworthy.
The Cabell’s Predatory Reports covers approximately 16000 titles, significantly expanding the resources offered to scholars to manage the predatory journal threat. Cabell’s identifies questionable journals based on 65 behavioural indicators. Cabell’s is not limited to open access journals, as it includes journals published by the large publishing companies.
Cabells' Predatory Journal Criteria
References:
Anderson, R. (2019). Cabell’s Predatory Journal Blacklist: An Updated Review. The Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved from https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/05/01/cabells-predatory-journal-blacklist-an-updated-review/
Bisaccio, M. (2018). Cabells’ Journal Whitelist and Blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations. Learned Publishing, (March). http://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1164
Hoffecker, L. (2018). Resource review. Cabells Scholarly Analytics. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(2), 270–272. http://doi.org/dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.120
Strielkowski, W. (2018). Predatory Publishing: What Are the Alternatives to Beall’s List? The American Journal of Medicine, 131(4), 333–334. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.10.054