مقایسهٔ روش‌ها

	نشریات و ناشران درنده	فرایند بازپس‌گیری مقاله
حوزه	اخلاق انتشار	اخلاق انتشار
خانواده	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
سال پیدایش	2010	1948
پدیدآور	Jeffrey Beall (University of Colorado Denver); international research community	Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); Retraction Watch initiative
نوع	Framework	Process
منبع بنیادین	Beall, J. (2010). Predatory Open-Access Scholarly Publishers. The Charleston Advisor, 11(4), 10–17.	Committee on Publication Ethics (2019). Retraction Guidelines. COPE.
نام‌های دیگر	Predatory Publishing, Fake Journals, Pay-to-Publish Schemes	Retraction Notice, Paper Retraction, Correction Notice
مرتبط	4	4
خلاصه	Predatory journals are fake academic publishers that exploit the open-access model by charging authors publication fees without providing peer review, editorial oversight, or quality control. Coined by librarian Jeffrey Beall in 2010, the term describes publishers that prioritize profit over scientific integrity, accepting nearly all submissions (regardless of quality), using deceptive marketing (claiming high impact factors, faking indexing, using names similar to established journals), and often hosting work that would not survive peer review. Publishing in predatory journals damages an author's credibility and wastes research dissemination efforts.	An article retraction is the invalidation of a published article due to serious flaws (data fraud, major methodological errors, ethical violations) that undermine its conclusions. Retractions are distinct from corrections (which address minor errors) and are initiated by authors, editors, or institutions when integrity is compromised. The first modern retraction was published in 1948. COPE published formal Retraction Guidelines in 2009 (updated 2019) that specify when retraction is appropriate, how it is conducted, and how retraction notices are recorded. Retracted articles remain in the literature with a visible 'RETRACTED' watermark, preserving the scientific record and warning readers.