HEC says it will strengthen its monitoring role to ensure fair research in country

In its written reply to a story, ‘Fraudulent research thriving in Pakistan due to HEC’s apathy’, published in The News on October 25, the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC) has denied that it has been apathetic towards fraudulent research practices in the country.

The commission, however, acknowledged some of the points raised in the story and said that it had been working to improve its monitoring of unfair means being employed by academic researchers in the country and further strengthen the HEC Journal Recognition System (HJRS) which was developed for the recognition of international and local journals.

The News story had stated that various researchers in the country had had their papers published in clone and predatory journals and no proper mechanism seemed to be in place to keep a check on such academic frauds and deceptions.

In its response, the HEC stated that it only accepted the articles published in its approved journals for promotions and perks to the teachers instead of articles published in predatory and clone journals. “The HEC approved the local journals after review by relevant experts and international journals indexed with Scopus and Web of Science.”

But in the same statement, the HEC appreciated The News story which had stated that even a common man could find about the authenticity of a research journal through the platforms of international watchdogs such as Retraction Watch, Beall's List and Internet Archives.

The Retraction Watch has listed hundreds of papers authored by Pakistani researchers, which were retracted after publication in authentic journals due to plagiarism, stolen data, error in results and other reasons. Meanwhile, the Beall’s List includes two papers mills in the country, Pakistan Science Mission and Pak Insight, publishing around 60 fake journals.

“[The] HEC also delists the journals which are included in Global research watchdogs i.e. DOAJ removed list and ABDC as per policy. Furthermore, the journals delisted by Scopus and Web of Science are also delisted by HEC,” reads the commission response.

However, the HJRS has no mechanism to identify when and for how long any journal or its specific issue was de-listed by the indexing and impact finding companies such as Scopus and Web of Science.

The HEC wrote: “Currently, the HEC is not considering Beall’s List as that list is de-activated since 2017 due to defamation lawsuits against Beall, as well as official complaints against Beall's work to the University of Colorado. As a result, Beall deactivated his blog and the list in January 2017”. However, this statement does not seem to corroborate information on the website of Beall’s List, according to which it updated its section on the hijacked and predatory journals in 2020.

“[The] HEC will take care and strengthen its monitory role during revision of policies of research journals on the recommendations of the Committee already constituted for this purpose,” read the response.

The commission also claimed that “it has only approved those international journals which are indexed with Scopus and Web of Science that are well-reputed international indexing agencies”.

However, the HEC has so far not included other international indexing agencies such as PubMed, EBSCO, IJIFACTOR, EMBASE, ISI, and Thomson for the recognition of journals. Hundreds of Pakistanis are producing their papers and articles in journals indexed by these companies. If the commission does not recognise such journals indexed by international agencies other than Scopus and Web of Science, those Pakistani researchers would suffer as their academic work would go in vain.

The News story had mentioned that some researchers in the country seemed to have deliberately committed academic fraud in reputed journals and once their malpractice was discovered, their papers were retracted, but the commission had so far not taken any action against such academics. To this, the HEC replied, “This point is noted and will be presented to the committee for deliberations.”

The News story had also pointed out the problem of clone journals, which are substandard journals named after genuine journals and due to the same name, they deceive many academics who sent their papers to them for publication.

A clone journal named Multicultural Education was mentioned in the story that is recognised by the HEC and many Pakistani academics have published their papers in it. To this problem, the HEC replied, “The Journal ‘Multicultural Education’ is claimed by two companies Caddo Gap Press International Journal Documentation & Research Institute (IJDRI). The journal owned by Caddo Gap Press; United States is indexed with Scopus and included in HJRS. However, an email is sent to Scopus and ISSN for verification as how can two companies claim a same journal with same ISSN.”

Another online journal named Psychology and Education, which some two years ago was published with the title of Psychology, was also identified by The News as a clone journal. To this, the commission said that the journal was included in the HJRS in July 2021 as it was indexed in Scopus. “However, Scopus delisted this journal in October 2021.” The response did not mention whether the HJRS had followed suit and delisted that journal.

The HEC should also publicise its decisions of listing or de-listing journals so that the academics know clearly whether or not they are sending their papers to a credible journal. It will be a waste of academic work if researchers end up having their paper published in a de-listed journal.

Sometimes, indexing agencies approved a journal again after they had de-listed it. In that case, the researchers may again send their publications to those journals but the HEC’s

system seems not to have any such mechanism that keeps track of periods for which a particular journal was de-listed.

The News story had also reported that the HEC had recently recognised the University of Karachi’s Journal of History and Social Science in its Y category although it had been established with facts that the journal was discontinued in 2013 and then mysteriously revived in 2019 with a large number of backdated issues.

Responding to it, the commission wrote, “The matter was discussed in meeting of EARB/GRC held on October 01, 2021. The EARB/GRC recommended getting response from Chief Editor before any decision. The letter has been sent to Chief Editor for further information.”

This suggests that the commission recognised the journal even before receiving any reply from the chief editor. To the criticism over not taking action against two paper mills publishing 60 fake journals, the HEC responded, “The comment of writer about the acknowledgement of non-consideration of 60 journals in HJRS is appreciated. However, they have never applied to HEC for recognition.” The response did not mention if the commission intended to take action against such papers mills that have been maligning Pakistan’s academic and scientific reputation.