The rise of predatory publishing has become a significant concern in academia, with many publishers exploiting researchers for profit without adhering to standard publishing ethics. One such publisher that has garnered attention for these practices is Indiana Publications. Despite its claims of legitimacy, Indiana Publications exhibits numerous characteristics commonly associated with predatory publishers, including publishing AI-generated and plagiarized content, skipping the peer review process, and maintaining an unclear editorial board. This case study examines the evidence that classifies Indiana Publications as a predatory publisher, revealing the risks it poses to both authors and the broader academic community.
Evidence of Predatory Practices by Indiana Publications
We excluded articles with less than 40% plagiarism from this report, although they also exhibited elements of plagiarism. Furthermore, we had to narrow our scope due to the high cost of producing this report. A summary of the findings is presented in the table below:
Journal 01:Indiana Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
Website: indianapublications.com/journal/IJHSS
Journal 02: Indiana Journal of Arts & Literature
Website: indianapublications.com/journal/IJAL
Other Predatory journals published by Indiana Publications
- Indiana Journal of Economics and Business Management – ISSN: 2583-3758
- Indiana Journal of Agriculture and Life Sciences – ISSN: 2583-1623
- Indiana Journal of Multidisciplinary Research – ISSN: 2583-3820
Important points for selecting Indiana Publications as a Predatory Publisher
1. Excessive AI-Generated and Plagiarized Content
One of the most concerning issues with Indiana Publications is its unusually high level of AI-generated and plagiarized content. Investigations and independent evaluations reveal that up to 99% of their articles have been AI-produced or plagiarized from other sources. This reliance on plagiarized content and artificial intelligence to create publications suggests that Indiana Publications disregards academic standards of originality and intellectual honesty. This practice indicates a focus on quantity over quality, prioritizing publication volume at the expense of meaningful academic contributions.
2. Lack of a Genuine Peer Review Process
A rigorous peer review process is central to any reputable academic publisher. Unfortunately, Indiana Publications appears to bypass this process entirely. Reports from authors and readers indicate that articles submitted to Indiana Publications are often published almost immediately—sometimes within hours or days—making thorough peer review impossible. This disregard for peer review is a clear indicator of predatory practices, as it primarily focuses on rapid publication and profit over maintaining the quality and credibility of academic research.
3. Lack of Transparency in the Editorial Board
In legitimate publishing, the editorial board is transparent, with visible credentials and affiliations for each member. In the case of Indiana Publications, however, the editorial board is obscured, with minimal or no information provided about its members. This lack of transparency makes it difficult, if not impossible, for authors and readers to verify the expertise and credibility of those overseeing the publication. This hidden editorial structure is common in predatory publishers, who often use it to avoid accountability and maintain an illusion of legitimacy.
4. Absence of Ethical Publishing Standards
Another hallmark of predatory publishers is the absence of documented ethical standards, such as adherence to the guidelines established by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). Indiana Publications lacks publicly accessible ethical guidelines, retraction policies, or procedures for addressing issues such as misconduct or conflicts of interest. This absence of accountability reflects a disregard for the ethical responsibilities expected of a scholarly publisher, further underscoring its predatory nature.
Conclusion: Why Indiana Publications Qualifies as a Predatory Publisher
This case study demonstrates that Indiana Publications exhibits multiple indicators of a predatory publisher. Its reliance on AI-generated and plagiarized content, lack of peer review, obscured editorial board, and absence of ethical standards collectively suggest that Indiana Publications prioritizes profit over quality. For researchers, publishing with such a publisher can harm their professional reputations and diminish the impact of their work.
As predatory publishing continues to affect academia, authors, institutions, and funding bodies must remain vigilant. Thoroughly evaluating a publisher’s policies, reviewing editorial transparency, and confirming peer review processes are crucial steps in identifying and avoiding predatory publishers like Indiana Publications. By doing so, researchers can protect their work, contribute to credible scholarship, and ensure their findings reach reputable, trustworthy audiences.