Quality assessment of Cabell’s List of predatory journals

Assess the quality of Cabell’s List of predatory journals, including its accuracy, coverage, and methodology, to determine its reliability for identifying predatory publishing outlets.

Background

The authors review several efforts to compile lists of predatory journals, noting that creating a complete and dependable list is extremely challenging. They mention historical and national lists (e.g., Beall’s list, China’s Early Warning Journal List, Algeria’s list) and discuss their limitations.

Regarding Cabell’s List, a paywalled commercial resource, the authors explicitly state that they cannot comment on its quality. This signals an unresolved question about the list’s reliability and usefulness for the mathematical sciences community and beyond.