shouldiuse.io

Categories

VERDICT

Beallslist Review

Depends

Should I use Beallslist?

Skip to content - beallslist.net

· 1 week ago

Researchers, librarians, and authors use this free list as a first check for predatory journals. It is stale and contested, so treat it as one signal, never a final verdict.

Confidence

Medium. Based on 15 public sources, mostly academic papers and community posts. No product reviews with ratings exist.

Ratings

  • Value for money
  • Ease of use
  • Feature depth
  • Support quality
  • Security postureNo security evidence found in sources.

Pricing

Free

Public list

ModelNot disclosed
Monthly feesNot disclosed
HardwareNot disclosed
Free tierYes

Best for

  • Researchers choosing where to submit
  • Librarians vetting unfamiliar journals
  • Authors screening solicitation emails

Not for

  • Anyone needing updated, evidence-backed verdicts
  • Institutions needing defensible, appeal-ready checks
  • Developers wanting an API or database integration
  • Buyers of paid, reviewed blacklists like Cabell's

Gotchas - check before you buy

high

No support channel and no appeal process for wrongly listed journals.

high

Pages present archived snapshots; new predatory journals miss the list.

medium

Free names only; paid Cabell's Blacklist adds structured review data.

Pros and cons

Pros

  • Free public list of predatory publishers and standalone journals.
  • Widely cited in peer-reviewed research on predatory publishing.
  • Publishes criteria for recognizing predatory journals.
  • Fills the gap after Beall shut the original list in 2017.

Cons

  • Static archive; the original list went dark in January 2017.
  • Anonymous update, no named editorial team.
  • Some legitimate publishers claim wrongful listing.
  • Credibility is contested among academics.

Sources & method

- 9 sources - No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.

official x3review x4news x2

Key stats

  • Value for money: 5/5

    Rating

  • Free

    Starting price

  • 9

    Sources

  • Analyzed

  • Value for money: 5/5. Free and widely cited by researchers.
  • Ease of use: 4/5. Simple browsable lists, no signup.
  • Feature depth: 2/5. Name lists only, little per-journal evidence.
  • Support quality: 1/5. Anonymous maintainer, no support or appeal path.
  • Security posture. No security evidence found in sources.
  • $0 Price Free public list
  • Jan 2017 Original list ended Reported by Retraction Watch
  • Anonymous Maintained by Community continuation since 2017
  • 2023 Latest usage study Peer-reviewed survey of list use

Pricing

Public list

Free

  • Predatory publisher list
  • Standalone journals list
  • Recognition criteria page

Security

No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.

What users say

Academics treat the list as a useful but imperfect and contested first-pass screening tool.

“Beall's List of Predatory Journals is an invaluable, even if...”
Facebook, Reviewer 2 community
“Predatory journals: Beall's List is missed”
ResearchGate, paper title

Alternatives

Compare Beallslist with each alternative.

  • Cabell's Blacklist

    Paid blacklist with structured review data per journal.

  • DOAJ

    Free whitelist of vetted open access journals.

    Beallslist vs DOAJ

  • Think. Check. Submit.

    Free checklist for vetting unfamiliar journals.

Full analysis

Based on 15 public sources, mostly academic papers and community posts. No product reviews with ratings exist.

Free archived list of predatory journals. Good first check for authors, stale since 2017, contested listings. Pair with DOAJ or Cabell.

Methodology

Based on 15 public sources, mostly academic papers and community posts. No product reviews with ratings exist.

Read how a report is made.

Sources

  1. Standalone Journalsbeallslist.net
    official
  2. Criteria for determining predatory publishersbeallslist.us
    official
  3. Why did Beall's List go dark?retractionwatch.com
    news
  4. Predatory journals: Perception, impact and use of Beall's listpmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
    review
  5. Beall's List and Cabell's Blacklist: A Comparisonresearchgate.net
    review
  6. Fake online resources blackmailing publishers with black listsresearchgate.net
    review
  7. Is Beall's List credible?researchgate.net
    review
  8. Beall-listed Frontiers empire strikes backforbetterscience.com
    news
  9. Product security pagebeallslist.net
    official

Add this review to your site

This check for Beallslist says Depends.

Put the badge on your site.

Visitors see the independent review.

The link points here, and search engines follow it.

This is the badge visitors see on your site.

Depends Beallslist Independent review on Should I Use It

Paste one snippet. Keep the link as it is. A nofollow tag stops search engines from following it.

Rate this review

Anonymous. You can change your vote.

Loading votes…

Comments

One queue. No nested comments. Give a display name first. Limit: 200 words per comment and 7 comments per day. You can edit or delete yours.

Save a name to write a comment.

0 / 200 words

No comments yet.