The same editorial board for a whole portfolio of journals

As there are several thousand journals, it is practically impossible to ascertain whether one editorial board is connected with multiple journals.

Fictitious members of editorial boards

This criterion can only be verified by searching for the board members on the websites of their institutions. Besides the time-consuming nature of verifying this criterion, especially when the editorial board has many members, not all institutions provide information about their employees or students due to personal data protection.

Well-known and successful researchers are included among the editorial-board members without their knowledge.

Not all scholars provide information about their membership on the website of their institution. Reasons for this may vary (e.g. the design of their institution’s website does not allow it, lack of interest on the side of the author, no obligation to provide such information, etc.). Therefore, this criterion can only be verified by contacting the scholar directly. The question remains to what extent are scholars willing to reply to questions regarding their membership on editorial boards.

The editorial board has only a few members or it is not international and its members come mainly from developing countries

In terms of the number of editorial-board members, authorities such as COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME do not set out any standard for whether this criterion is violated or fulfilled.

Even the prevalence of people from developing countries on the editorial board and the implied lower quality of editorial work is controversial. Under globalization, an increasing number of representatives from third countries on editorial boards is a natural development. In particular, there are many regional journals whose editorial-board members are mostly from the respective region, yet such journals are not lacking in professional quality.

Affiliation of the editorial-board members is not accurate

This is the only criterion associated with the editorial board which we recommend checking, although we are aware that even this criterion may be problematic. As follows from the sample below, even such a prestigious journal as CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians with the highest impact factor (223.679 v r. 2018) does not provide the full affiliation (i.e. institution and state/city) of its editorial-board members but only their institutions. In the case of strict control, this would mean that in terms of formal criteria, this journal would be evaluated as untrustworthy. Nevertheless, we recommend checking this criterion, because only with full affiliation can an author or reader identify an editorial-board member unimpeachably. At the same time, this is also a criterion set by the COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME authorities.