VaultBiblio Guardian serves as a premier scholarly venue for rigorous investigation and documentation of malpractices within academic publishing ecosystems. The journal facilitates critical discourse on predatory publishing phenomena, fostering evidence-based approaches to safeguarding scholarly communication integrity.
Our publication adheres to the highest standards of investigative scholarship, employing systematic methodologies to examine, analyze, and disseminate findings regarding deceptive academic practices that compromise research dissemination quality and exploit scholarly communities.
The Editorial Board comprises distinguished scholars specializing in bibliometrics, research integrity, scholarly communication, and academic ethics. Members possess extensive expertise in investigating academic misconduct and maintaining rigorous publication standards.
All submissions undergo rigorous editorial scrutiny, ensuring adherence to evidence-based reporting principles. The journal maintains strict verification protocols and implements comprehensive fact-checking procedures for all published content.
The journal maintains stringent conflict of interest protocols, ensuring editorial independence and scholarly objectivity. All editorial decisions are made transparently, with appropriate disclosure of potential conflicts.
Original empirical investigations examining predatory publishing phenomena, utilizing systematic methodologies and providing novel insights into academic misconduct patterns.
Length: 6,000-8,000 words | Abstract: 250 words maximum
Detailed analyses of specific predatory entities or incidents, providing comprehensive documentation and lessons learned for the scholarly community.
Length: 3,000-5,000 words | Abstract: 200 words maximum
Innovative approaches to detecting, analyzing, or preventing predatory practices in academic publishing and scholarly communication.
Length: 4,000-6,000 words | Abstract: 250 words maximum
Comprehensive syntheses of existing literature on predatory publishing topics, providing critical analysis and identifying research gaps.
Length: 8,000-10,000 words | Abstract: 300 words maximum
Scholarly opinions on current issues in academic publishing integrity, policy recommendations, and professional discourse contributions.
Length: 2,000-3,000 words | Abstract: 150 words maximum
Concise reports of preliminary findings, alerts regarding emerging predatory practices, or time-sensitive information for the academic community.
Length: 1,500-2,500 words | Abstract: 150 words maximum
All submissions must adhere to stringent ethical standards, including appropriate human subjects protections when applicable, transparent disclosure of data sources, and adherence to institutional research ethics protocols. Authors must provide explicit consent documentation when featuring identifiable entities or individuals in their research.
Editorial assessment within 2 weeks of submission, evaluating scope alignment, methodological rigor, and contribution significance.
Minimum two expert reviewers conduct comprehensive evaluation, with additional reviewers assigned for complex or controversial submissions.
Final determination based on reviewer recommendations, editorial board consultation, and adherence to journal standards and objectives.
Authors may appeal editorial decisions through formal written request to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of notification. Appeals undergo independent review by Editorial Board members not involved in the original decision process.
The journal maintains transparent appeals procedures ensuring fair consideration of all scholarly contributions while upholding rigorous publication standards.
All articles published under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, ensuring unrestricted access to scholarly content.
Indexed in major academic databases including DOAJ, Scopus, Web of Science, and specialized library science indexes.
Long-term preservation ensured through CLOCKSS, Portico, and institutional repository partnerships.