Frontiers in Psychology is a peer-reviewed open-access academic journal covering all aspects of psychology in 27 sections. It did, however, determine that the legal context is insufficiently clear and therefore Frontiers wishes to retract the published article." I have published over fifty articles in my career, including four in Frontiers (in Immunology and Microbiology). Meet the Frontiers Team Frontiers journals lead in citations in their fields and rank in the top Impact Factor percentiles. But I must admit that Frontiers generally leaves more opportunities for authors to defend their work, which is not a bad thing.Reviewers have, I think, less opportunity to reject an article without justification, which is also not a bad thing. And what about the countless errata and corrigendum sections in Nature, is this not somewhat fishy? According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2019 impact factor of 2.067. Frontiers は Predatory journal か? 日本ではハゲタカジャーナルの名で知られる predatory journals 金を稼ぎたい出版社と、(怪しくても)業績(の数)が欲しい研究者の思惑が一致した、怪しい雑誌の総称 … You have received this message because you have previously been in contact with Frontiers or because, due to your profile and expertise, it was thought likely that it would be of interest to you. Ivertis Journals "Wishing You With Mighty Heart", Immense Pleasure from Open Access Text (OAT). In a recent case, reviewers requested more data to validate key statments in a submitted manuscript. Read the full analysis here. It was established in 2010 and is published by Frontiers Media, who were controversially included in Jeffrey Beall's list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers". Frederic was setting up a new, online, open access, peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities. Journal changes its tune on climate paper", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frontiers_in_Psychology&oldid=972584614, Short description is different from Wikidata, Articles with unsourced statements from March 2016, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 12 August 2020, at 21:28. I have had the opportunity several times to find that well-established journals tolerate authoritative arguments from reviewers, which is not very serious. But this is only my personal experience which is quite limited. I looked around to learn what people were saying about it after receiving a request to review a manuscript for. [12] There was public discussion about apparent contradictions between the statements issued by the journal. The statement gave the main reason for retraction as insufficient protection for the rights of the studied subjects. There were public concerns about the "chilling effect" of the decision on research. Articles have been carefully reviewed. [13], Frontiers Media was included in Jeffrey Beall's list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers" before Beall took the decision to shut down his website,[14] though both COPE and OASPA have stated that they have no concerns with Frontiers' membership of their organizations. Thanks for the post and eventhough it is old I want to comment on it.Frontiers section journals have a chief editor, associate editors and review editors. After Frontiers was listed as a potential predatory publisher, ... concerns about two articles recently published in Frontiers in Psychology were emailed to the Frontiers editorial office. Potential predatory scholarly open‑access publishers. Is Frontiers Media a Predatory Publisher? In March 2014, Frontiers retracted the study, and made a statement that they had received "a small number of complaints". One of the reviewers of the paper said that the withdrawal was unwarranted, and she would no longer carry out reviews for the journal. The editor-in-chief is Axel Cleeremans (Université libre de Bruxelles). Frontiers in Psychology is a peer-reviewed open-access academic journal covering all aspects of psychology in 27 sections. Our community needs more venues to publish in, Digital Humanities has a commitment to open access, and having helped set up an online, peer revie… In April 2013, Frontiers in Psychology retracted a controversial article linking climate change denialism and "conspiracist ideation"; the retraction was itself also controversial and led to the resignations of at least three editors. Individuals have complained about the shallowness of the review process (e.g., 1, 2) and allegedly heavy-handed or unscrupulous tactics by Frontiers to shut down Beall's list of predatory journals (e.g., 3, 4). I have also been invited by an editor of a Springer journal to review a paper of which I was a co-author. Reviews usually go over more than just 1 or 2 review rounds and offer the opportunity for a discussion between authors and reviewers (under supervision of the associate editor). This is a very constructive and helpful process to improve the scientific quality.I also want to challenge critics, as I have experienced countless examples of illegitimate behaviours by "established" publishers and their editors. It was established in 2010 and is published by Frontiers Media, who were controversially included in Jeffrey Beall's list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers".[1][2]. Publications of editors are only listed if they show up in the journals own publication database (loop). [10][11][citation needed] On 4 April 2014 Costanza Zucca, editorial director of the journal, and Fred Fenter, executive editor, issued a statement saying that Frontiers did not cave in to threats, and it in fact received no threats. Frontiers in Psychology is the largest journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across the psychological sciences, from clinical research to cognitive science, from perception to consciousness, from imaging studies to human factors, and from animal cognition to social psychology.