How do you avoid predatory journals when publishing your research?

A predatory journal takes your fee, skips real peer review, and can trap your paper, and for Vietnamese researchers it can damage a whole career. These journals look legitimate at a glance — professional logos, an "impact factor," a same-week acceptance email — but they exploit the open-access model for profit while offering none of the editorial quality a Scopus Q1 or Q2 title provides.

Avoiding them is a skill you can learn before you ever hit submit. This guide answers the seven questions Vietnamese postgraduate researchers ask MAAS publishing mentors most often about spotting and steering clear of predatory journals.

Author: MAAS Editorial Team · Reviewed by a Principal Publishing Advisory mentor (PhD, Scopus Q1 author and reviewer)
Last updated: 2026-06-04
Category: research-methods

What exactly is a predatory journal?

Direct answer: A predatory journal is one that prioritises its own profit over scholarship — charging publication fees while failing to deliver genuine peer review, editorial oversight, or long-term archiving. It mimics the appearance of a legitimate journal but skips the quality controls that make publication meaningful.

Evidence: In 2019 an international panel of 43 experts meeting in Ottawa reached a consensus definition published in Nature: predatory journals "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 solicitation practices" (Grudniewicz et al., Nature, 2019). The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) describes the same pattern as journals with no rigorous peer review that exploit open access for financial gain (COPE discussion document, 2019).

Example: A Vietnamese master's graduate brought a MAAS mentor an "acceptance" email received four days after submission, with a request for a US$600 fee. The mentor showed her that genuine peer review almost never resolves in days, and that the journal appeared on no recognised index. She withdrew before paying and redirected the paper to a properly indexed Q2 title.

Why are predatory journals especially risky for Vietnamese researchers?

Direct answer: Vietnamese researchers face extra exposure because publication is tied to graduation, promotion, and funding milestones, which creates pressure to publish fast. Predatory journals target exactly that urgency, and a paper placed in one can fail to count toward a degree or a Ministry-recognised requirement — wasting both money and a result.

Evidence: A study of predatory publishing in Scopus found that authors from a small number of countries — including Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia — were disproportionately represented among papers in journals later flagged for quality concerns (Macháček & Srholec, Scientometrics, 2021). Scopus itself runs an ongoing monitoring process through its Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) and discontinues titles that breach standards, meaning a journal "indexed" at submission time can be removed afterward (Elsevier Scopus content policy, 2024).

Example: A doctoral candidate in Ho Chi Minh City needed a Scopus-indexed article for her programme. She had paid to publish in a journal that was quietly discontinued from Scopus months later, so the article no longer satisfied her requirement. Working with a MAAS Publishing Advisory mentor, she rebuilt the study for a stable Q2 journal and verified its indexing status before resubmitting.

What are the clearest warning signs of a predatory journal?

Direct answer: The strongest red flags are an unrealistically fast review promise, fees that are hidden or only revealed after acceptance, fake or unverifiable metrics, a sloppy website with spelling errors, and an unsolicited email flattering you and guaranteeing publication. No single sign is proof, but several together are a clear warning.

Evidence: COPE, Think. Check. Submit., and university research-integrity guides converge on the same markers: peer review that typically takes at least three months in legitimate journals versus days in predatory ones, misleading or fabricated impact metrics, and aggressive solicitation (COPE, 2019; Think. Check. Submit., 2024). The table below summarises how a trustworthy journal compares with a predatory one on the signals you can check yourself.

Example: A MAAS-coached lecturer forwarded an email inviting her to publish in a "special issue" within two weeks. Her mentor walked her through the table, point by point: the journal listed a "Universal Impact Factor" that does not exist, gave no postal address, and was absent from DOAJ. She deleted the invitation.

How does the Think. Check. Submit. checklist work?

Direct answer: Think. Check. Submit. is a free, cross-industry initiative that gives researchers a structured checklist to assess whether a journal is a trustworthy home for their work. You answer a series of yes/no questions about the journal's transparency, review process, fees, and indexing, and the pattern of answers tells you whether to proceed.

Evidence: The Think. Check. Submit. journal checklist asks, among other things, whether you or colleagues recognise the journal, whether the publisher's contact details are genuine, whether the peer-review process is clearly described, whether fees are transparent, and whether the journal is listed in a recognised index such as DOAJ (Think. Check. Submit., 2024). The checklist is available in more than 40 languages, which makes it directly usable for Vietnamese ESL researchers.

Example: A MAAS mentor runs every first-time author through Think. Check. Submit. as a Draft-stage step. One Vietnamese engineering candidate found that his shortlisted journal failed three checklist items — no named editor, no DOAJ listing, and an unexplained fee — and switched to a verified alternative before submitting.

How do you verify a journal is legitimate before submitting?

Direct answer: Cross-check the journal against independent databases rather than trusting its own website. Confirm it is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) if it is open access, verify the ISSN in the official ISSN Portal, check whether the publisher is a COPE member, and confirm indexing directly in Scopus or Web of Science — not from a logo on the journal's page.

Evidence: DOAJ applies vetting criteria before listing a journal and contains very few predatory titles, making inclusion a strong positive signal (DOAJ, 2024). The ISSN Portal lets you confirm a journal's registered identity and catch titles that imitate established names (ISSN International Centre, 2024). COPE membership indicates a publisher has committed to recognised ethics standards (COPE, 2024). Because predatory sites routinely display fake "indexed in Scopus" badges, the only reliable check is searching the source list on the index's own site.

Example: A Vietnamese public-health researcher was reassured by a "Scopus indexed" banner on a journal's homepage. Her MAAS mentor searched the official Scopus source list and found the title was not there at all. The banner was fabricated; the journal was avoided.

What about unsolicited invitation emails and fake impact factors?

Direct answer: Treat unsolicited emails inviting you to publish quickly, join an editorial board, or contribute to a "special issue" as warning signs, not opportunities. Legitimate journals rarely chase individual authors. Be equally sceptical of any "impact factor" that is not the Clarivate Journal Impact Factor or Scopus CiteScore — predatory journals invent official-sounding metrics.

Evidence: Aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation is part of the consensus definition of predatory publishing (Grudniewicz et al., Nature, 2019). Research-integrity guides repeatedly warn that predatory journals advertise fabricated metrics with names designed to resemble the real Journal Impact Factor (COPE, 2019; university library guides, 2023). Only two journal-level metrics are widely recognised: Clarivate's Journal Impact Factor and Elsevier's Scopus CiteScore.

Example: A MAAS Publishing Advisory client almost accepted an editorial-board invitation flattering her "distinguished record" — for a journal she had never heard of. Her mentor pointed out that real boards are appointed through scholarly networks, not cold email, and that the journal's "Scientific Impact Factor" was a made-up label. She declined.

What should you do if you have already submitted to or published in a predatory journal?

Direct answer: Act quickly. If the paper is only submitted, request immediate withdrawal in writing and do not pay any fee. If it is already published, seek advice from your supervisor or a publishing mentor before doing anything else, because predatory publishers often refuse retractions and may hold your manuscript hostage. The goal is to limit damage and protect your ability to publish the work properly elsewhere.

Evidence: Predatory publishers have been documented refusing to withdraw submissions, effectively trapping manuscripts and preventing legitimate resubmission elsewhere (UKSG Insights, 2019). Because most reputable journals will not consider work already published, recovering a trapped paper is difficult — which is why prevention matters far more than cure.

Example: A Vietnamese researcher came to MAAS after paying to publish in a journal that then ignored her withdrawal requests. Her mentor helped her document the correspondence, assess what could be salvaged, and design a substantially new study from the same data set that could be submitted cleanly to a legitimate Q2 journal — with the journal's status verified in advance this time.

Frequently asked questions

Is every journal that charges a fee predatory?
No. Many reputable open-access journals charge a legitimate article processing charge (APC) that is stated clearly upfront. The problem is not the fee itself but hidden fees, absent peer review, and fake metrics. Always check what the fee covers and when it is charged.

Does a journal being indexed in Scopus guarantee it is safe?
Not permanently. Scopus discontinues journals that breach its standards, so a title indexed when you submit can be removed later. Verify indexing on the official Scopus source list at the time of submission, and prefer journals with a long, stable record.

What is the fastest single check I can do?
Search the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the official ISSN Portal. If an open-access journal is absent from DOAJ or its ISSN does not match, treat that as a serious warning and investigate further before submitting.

Are predatory conferences a related risk?
Yes. The same operators often run predatory conferences with similar tactics — unsolicited invitations, vague organisers, and fees with little academic value. Apply the same scepticism and verification you would use for a journal.

Can I trust a journal recommended in an email from a "colleague"?
Be careful. Predatory operators sometimes spoof or imitate names. Verify the journal independently through DOAJ, the ISSN Portal, and the index's own source list rather than relying on the recommendation alone.

Can MAAS help me avoid predatory journals?
Yes. MAAS Publishing Advisory coaches Vietnamese researchers through journal selection, verification, and submission using the Outline → Draft → Final model — including a Think. Check. Submit. screen and an indexing check before you submit. Book a consultation through our contact page.

Choose a safe journal with a mentor who has been on the editor's side

The cheapest mistake to avoid in publishing is the one that costs you a paper and a fee for nothing. MAAS Publishing Advisory pairs Vietnamese researchers with a PhD-level mentor — 23% of our experts hold doctorates — for a free 20-minute consultation, matches you to the right advisor within 48 hours, and backs every engagement with our three-tier Pass / Merit / Distinction guarantee and a 90-day post-submission warranty. We coach you through verifying and selecting a legitimate journal; you stay the author, every step.

Book a Publishing Advisory consultation with MAAS Academic Mentoring →

Related guides

• How do you choose the right Scopus journal for your paper? — the fit-and-scope work that comes right after you confirm a journal is legitimate
• How does a Vietnamese researcher get published in a Scopus Q1 or Q2 journal? — the full publication journey this verification step sits inside
• What is the difference between a Q1 and a Q2 journal? — how journal quartiles work once you are looking at legitimate titles
• How do you publish a medical imaging AI study in a Q1 journal? — the rigor and reporting standards a legitimate Q1 journal expects
• Publishing Advisory service — full service tiers for Scopus Q1/Q2 support
• Scopus Publishing resource hub — journal-selection checklists and submission tools

References

• Grudniewicz et al. — Predatory journals: no definition, no defence (Nature, 2019)
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) — Predatory publishing discussion document
• Think. Check. Submit. — Journal checklist
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
• ISSN International Centre — ISSN Portal
• Macháček & Srholec — Predatory publishing in Scopus: evidence on cross-country differences (Scientometrics, 2021)
• Elsevier — Scopus content policy and selection (CSAB)
• UKSG Insights — Predatory publishing practices: what researchers should know

This article is part of the MAAS Journal series for Vietnamese international postgraduate students and researchers. MAAS Publishing Advisory is an advisory partner — we coach authors through the Outline → Draft → Final delivery model with developmental feedback from PhD-level, Scopus-published mentors. We do not write, submit, or guarantee acceptance of work on an author's behalf.