Introduction: A Perfect Storm for Misinformation
When COVID-19 engulfed the globe, scientists raced against time to decode the virus. Amid this unprecedented pressure, another threat quietly multiplied: predatory journals—sham publications that prioritize profits over science. These outlets promised lightning-fast publication to desperate researchers while bypassing rigorous peer review. By capitalizing on pandemic panic, they flooded the academic landscape with potentially dangerous misinformation while siphoning millions from vulnerable scientists. The collision between a lethal virus and publishing's dark underbelly created a crisis within a crisis that still threatens scientific integrity today 1 2 .
Anatomy of a Predator: How These Journals Operate
Predatory journals mimic legitimate open-access publications but with sinister differences:
- Aggressive Spam Campaigns: Researchers received waves of emails soliciting COVID-19 papers with promises of "24-hour peer review" 2 .
- Fake Peer Review: No substantive feedback; manuscripts published regardless of quality for fees ranging $150–$1,200 2 .
- Indexing Lies: Falsely claiming inclusion in PubMed or other databases to appear credible 3 .
- Hijacked Identities: Some impersonated legitimate journals by stealing titles and ISSNs 3 .
The COVID Cash Grab: A Data-Driven Investigation
Key Study #1: The $46,000 Problem
In 2020, researchers tracked 114 predatory journals that published 367 COVID papers. Their financial analysis exposed a predatory economy:
| Article Type | Papers Published | Avg. APC | Total Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Original Research | 125 | $152 | $19,000 |
| Reviews | 172 | $126 | $21,672 |
| Commentaries | 70 | $78 | $5,460 |
| TOTAL | 367 | - | $46,132 |
Shockingly, only 6% of journals waived fees despite the global emergency. Researchers from low-income countries paid steep prices for publications that would never reach legitimate scientific databases 2 .
Key Study #2: The Predatory Pandemic Response
Chapman University's Ryan Allen conducted a parallel investigation:
- Identified 162 predatory journals in virology/immunology using Cabells' Predatory Reports 1
- Compared their COVID engagement against 174 legitimate DOAJ publications
- Analyzed website content and publication volumes (Jan–May 2020)
- Only 24% (39/162) of predatory journals published COVID content (vs. 68% of legitimate journals)
- Predatory publishers were 3× less likely to mention peer-review delays due to the pandemic
- Uncovered 284 additional predatory titles beyond virology/immunology publishing COVID papers
Source: Allen (2021) content analysis of publisher websites 1
"These outlets have proven to be vectors of misleading science. Libraries and educators must stay vigilant as information intermediaries."
The Scientist's Toolkit: Spotting Predatory Practices
Arm yourself with these evidence-based detection tools:
| Tool | Function | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Think. Check. Submit. | Step-by-step submission evaluation | thinkchecksubmit.org |
| Journal Evaluation Tool | Scores journal legitimacy across 10 criteria | LMU Librarian Publications |
| Hijacked Journal Checker | Identifies cloned journals | Retraction Watch |
| Cabells' Predatory Reports | Database of 15,000+ deceptive journals | Cabells.org |
| Email Assessment Tool | Analyzes solicitation emails for red flags | Figshare DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.7342769 |
| 5-Iodoisothiazole | 49602-30-4 | C3H2INS |
| Propargyl-PEG6-Ms | 1036204-62-2 | C14H26O8S |
| HS-Peg5-CH2CH2NH2 | 1347750-20-2 | C12H27NO5S |
| cis-Vaccenic acid | 506-17-2 | C18H34O2 |
| Carbamazepine-D10 | 132183-78-9 | C15H12N2O |
Legitimate Journal Indicators
- Clear peer review process described
- Transparent fee structure
- Editorial board with verifiable credentials
- Proper indexing in recognized databases
Predatory Journal Red Flags
- Aggressive email solicitations
- Unrealistically fast review promises
- Vague or non-existent editorial board
- Fake impact factors or indexing claims
Why This Still Matters: The Lasting Infection
The predatory publishing pandemic left enduring damage:
Misinformation Legitimization
Poor studies on ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine gained false credibility through "journal" branding 2 .
Career Harm
Early-career researchers wasted funds and publications on invisible outlets.
Systemic Distrust
Undermines public confidence in scientific publishing during future crises.
Legitimate databases like PubMed now actively purge predatory content, but new journals emerge daily. The solution? Global coordination:
- Fund open-access models without author fees
- Train researchers to evaluate journals
- Pressure social media to deplatform predatory publishers 1 3
"We estimated $33,807 was paid just for COVID papers in clearly predatory journals—money diverted from actual research during a global emergency."
Conclusion: Inoculating Academic Publishing
The predatory journal surge during COVID-19 exposed critical vulnerabilities in scholarly communication. While most pandemic-era predatory papers faded into obscurity, some continue to circulate as "evidence" for misinformation campaigns. Protecting science requires multidisciplinary vaccines: librarians screening collections, educators demystifying publishing, and institutions valuing quality over quantity. As Allen cautions, we haven't proven these journals caused COVID misinformation—but they created perfect conditions for its spread. In the next pandemic, the cure for predatory publishing must deploy faster than the pathogen itself 1 3 .
Want to check a journal?
Use free tools at: