
fit, costs and a predatory-journal screen
Journal finder
Rank your shortlist. Screen it for warning signs.
Try the journal finderThe film is unavailable. You can read what it shows below.
What the film shows, in words
- Which journal, and is it what it claims to be?
- Three journals. Two float. One is held under.
- Indexing not verified. Peer review not described. Editors not verifiable. Unsolicited invitation. Very fast decision promised.
- Three signs: still under. Two: it surfaces.
- Number 2 in the ranking, behind Journal A. Two signs still to weigh.
- You check at the source. Nothing here promises acceptance.
The demo: the worked example, one check at a time
ExampleThree invented journals, one with warning signs. It never touches your saved work.
Two journals float. One is held under by five warning signs.
Step 1 of 5
01Journal A (example)Best fit so far
02Journal B (example)
03Journal C (example)High risk
- Indexing not verified
- Peer review not described
- Editors not verifiable
- Unsolicited invitation
- Very fast decision promised
03Journal C (example)High risk
- Indexing not verified
- Peer review not described
- Editors not verifiable
- Unsolicited invitation
- Very fast decision promised
0 more below.
3 journals screened, 1 high risk. Best fit so far: Journal A (example). Order: Journal A, Journal B, Journal C.
Dated screen, no guarantee. Screened on 9 October 2026. Journals change; re-check before submitting. Nothing here promises acceptance.
- Journals screened
- 3
- High risk
- 1
- Best fit so far
- Journal A (example)
Now your shortlist, on the same line.
List the journals you are considering, check each one’s details yourself at the source, and record what you find. The finder ranks them on scope fit, speed and cost, and screens each for warning signs of predatory publishing. It promises nothing about acceptance.
The record, in words
Live| Journal | Scope fit | Fee | Weeks | Risk | Warning signs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal A (example) | 4/4 | None | 12 | Low | None |
| Journal B (example) | 3/4 | USD 1,200 | 8 | Low | None |
| Journal C (example) | 4/4 | USD 450 | 2 | High | indexing not verified; peer review not described; editors not verifiable; unsolicited invitation; very fast decision promised |
Screen
- Gap: Journal C (example): several warning signs.indexing not verified; peer review not described; editors not verifiable; unsolicited invitation; very fast decision promised. Avoid until each is resolved at the source.
- Note: Dated screen, no guarantee.Screened on 9 October 2026. Journals change; re-check before submitting. Nothing here promises acceptance.
Submission checklist
Before you submit
- Read the aims and scope, and three recent articles.
- Confirm indexing in the index itself, not on the journal’s site.
- Check the fee, waivers and licence terms.
- Follow the author guidelines exactly: length, format, references.
- Agree authorship and order with every co-author in writing.
GKM Strategic Advisory & AI
Journal shortlist criteria and submission checklist
Your organisation
01
02
03
3 screened · 1 high risk · best fit so far: Journal A (example)
Before you submit
- Read the aims and scope, and three recent articles.
- Confirm indexing in the index itself, not on the journal’s site.
- Check the fee, waivers and licence terms.
- Follow the author guidelines exactly: length, format, references.
- Agree authorship and order with every co-author in writing.
PDF · Screened on 9 October 2026 · no safety guarantee
Your dated checklist
Journal shortlist criteria and submission checklist, by email once delivery is connected.
Journal shortlist criteria and submission checklist (dated sources; no safety guarantee)
Tool: Journal finder Result: 1 high risk · best fit Journal A (example) Request: please discuss publication support (SVC-175).Send as a brief
How it ranks, and its limits.
The rules are published so you can check them. The tool compares the journals you enter; it endorses none of them.
- 01
Warning signs: indexing not verified at the index, peer review not described, editors not verifiable, unsolicited invitations, and decisions promised in under four weeks. Three or more is high risk.
- 02
Ranking favours scope fit, then fee within budget and time to decision; high-risk journals drop to the bottom.
- 03
Open access does not change the ranking: if you need it, journals that list no fee are flagged for you to confirm open access and the licence; if you do not, journals that charge a fee are flagged for you to ask about a route without it.
- 04
Every screen is dated.
- No warning signs
01
It stands at its fit: scope fit first, then the fee against your budget and the weeks to a decision.
- One or two: “Check”
01
It rides lower, with each sign named beneath it. It can still be ranked, and the signs stay in view.
- Three or more: “High”
01
Under the line whatever its fit, and set aside until each sign is resolved at the source.
What it cannot tell you
- You verify each detail at the source; the tool does not look journals up.
- No list of predatory journals is complete; judgement is needed.
- Nothing here promises acceptance.
Quality ruleNo acceptance promise; verify journal details and do not fabricate indexing.
When you need more than a shortlist
Service · 11 Research supervision, academic coaching & publication supportPublication support: thesis to journal article↗The researcher remains the author. Nothing here promises acceptance.
-
Prof. Wisdom GagakumaTool ownerBook the Professor · from USD 150 -
Michael GagakumaTool ownerBook Michael · from USD 90
