35

I published my first article a while ago, nothing special, just rigorous formalization of some well-known facts.

Now I got a mail writing

We have read about your published precious paper in FORMALIZED MATHEMATICS titled About Quotient Orders and Ordering Sequences, and the topic of the paper has impressed us a lot. The paper has attracted attention from researchers and scholars specializing in quotient order; ordered finite sequences.

Especially the last part looks manufactured, that are just the keywords extracted.

On behalf of the Editorial Board of the journal, we sincerely invite you to join our team as the editorial board member or reviewer of ******. Taking your academic background and rich experience in this field into account, the Board believe that you are quite qualified for this position. We believe that your position as the editorial board member or reviewer will shine a light on your research in related fields.

"academic background and rich experience" Yeah, but no. Really, really no, at this point in time.

So the email is clearly generated automatically, but the links seem to work and the journal does have entries in Google Scholar and an archive on their website, it is not a scam per se. It is an Open Access and Peer reviewed journal, but it is obvious I was just some entry and no one looked at my paper (or my academic background) seriously.

How serious can such an invitation be? Since it's a peer reviewed journal, are they just frantically looking for reviewers? Would they even consider a positive reaction of me, due to my academic short comings which start with me not even having a M.Sc. yet?

I'm specifically not asking for career advice. I'm not in the league of publication for too long, I don't really know how things like becoming a reviewer work, if this would be payed for anyhow, etc. If this mail constitutes a bad practice I would like to know because I will likely get more of these in the future.

SK19
  • 784
  • 7
  • 19
  • Can you see the paper in question? – Thomas Apr 22 '18 at 01:56
  • @Thomas This was a general invitation. They added MY abstract at the end of the mail. – SK19 Apr 22 '18 at 01:59
  • 29
    So it isn’t a specific review request. In that case, I would probably treat this as spam. – Thomas Apr 22 '18 at 02:05
  • 1
    Check the journal and its publisher against the predatory Open Access list. I bet it's there! – Oleg Lobachev Apr 22 '18 at 08:05
  • 5
    Regardless of the journal's quality, you will not be paid for peer reviewing. – astronat supports the strike Apr 22 '18 at 08:24
  • 8
    I get these often. I suggest deleting it and blocking the sender. – Bitwise Apr 22 '18 at 11:45
  • 3
    In this context, "precious" is also a red flag for spam... – Luke Sawczak Apr 22 '18 at 22:29
  • 1
    Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/8959/83888 I think this just turned up in the related questions since I added the disreputable-publishers tag – SK19 Apr 23 '18 at 01:57
  • I have a very easy filter: Have I ever heard of this journal (or one of the names mentioned, because they will try to mention people they work with if they are new)? No? Then it cannot be that important in my specific field of interest. There are two options: either I am not knowledgeable enough in the field they publish, or they are a scam. – skymningen Apr 24 '18 at 11:02

2 Answers2

49

Don't waste your time with it. You were smart to catch how the mail might have been generated (keywords etc). These mails are often sent out by journals that turn out to be predatory*; you wouldn't like to be associated with it.

If you accept, you may find your name being used here and there, in an attempt to increase the journal's scientific credibility. It is likely that their editorial board etc. is fluffed up in this manner (you could take a look at that if they've put up one, and see if there are any known researchers on their board). You are right — this is likely to happen repeatedly; ignore any requests that:

  1. mention a specific paper of yours and extend editorial board invitations — it's a sign of auto-generated content.

  2. appear in predatory journal lists.

  3. have extremely general scope (eg. STEM) and no matching editorial board.

EDITS: (1)* Predatory journals, in a nutshell, charge authors exorbitant fees to publish articles with little or no peer review, with very low visibility or scientific credibility. In the most extreme cases, the article may not even be published. In this manner, they are 'preying' on unsuspecting authors who submit their hard work. The linked question contains a detailed description.

(2) It would be a good idea not to respond to such mails at all, and to mark them as spam. Over time, it ll get easier to spot them right away.

AppliedAcademic
  • 13,178
  • 4
  • 36
  • 69
  • 2
    What exactly does "predatory" mean in this content? – SK19 Apr 22 '18 at 09:10
  • 1
    @SK19 : It means that they charge authors exorbitant fees to publish articles with little or no peer review, with very low visibility or scientific credibility. In the most extreme cases, the article may not even be published. – AppliedAcademic Apr 22 '18 at 09:25
  • 7
    Do have a look at this – AppliedAcademic Apr 22 '18 at 09:29
  • Please edit note about "charging fees, etc" into the answer. And maybe use a different word than "predatory"; it doesn't seem to fit. – Martin F Apr 23 '18 at 02:23
  • @MartinF - just to clarify, are you suggesting that I add the charging fee bit to the answer, or remove it from the comment? As for 'predatory', I believe this fits the category, based on similar mails I have received. Could you tell me why it seems inappropriate, I'd be glad to address that and edit if needed.:) – AppliedAcademic Apr 23 '18 at 04:06
  • 2
    Add the explanation to your answer to make it clear. If we have to ask, it's not clear. Keep the word if you like it. – Martin F Apr 23 '18 at 04:15
  • 1
    I wouldn't suggest to "deny", rather "ignore". – Zulan Apr 23 '18 at 11:53
  • 1
    Should the OP flag the mail as spam? Also pls make the [edit] that Zulan recommended – Qsigma Apr 23 '18 at 14:01
19

It is spam. Don't pay any attention to it. No genuine "publishing" source works this way.

paul garrett
  • 88,477
  • 10
  • 180
  • 343