Rédiger un PREreview

[99]

This study examines the growing vulnerability of authors in the Global South, particularly in South America, to predatory publishing practices. It highlights the relentless evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) and the challenges it poses in the academic landscape, particularly in generating unwanted fraudulent communications and blurring the lines between natural content and content produced by these technologies as an uncited part of scientific publications.

We applied an accepted decision-making methodology, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), to create a vulnerability profile and develop a self-assessment model to measure the academic exposure of South American authors. Based on bibliographic sources, we identified five categories of risk originating from unethical editorial practices: argumentation of communication with researchers, institutional pressures and academic promotion, authors' environment and profile, regions and countries, and self-information and literacy management.

Unifying the first three risk categories represents significance in terms of vulnerability, according to the Pareto 80/20 principle. These were managed in accordance with the ISO 31000 standard to propose concrete actions to mitigate the impacts of their consequences. These risks are well known for undermining the credibility of published and disseminated research, which, in the worst case, could jeopardize the open access environment. Finally, the limitations of this work are acknowledged, given the scope of the congress’ editorial policies and the structural factors requiring more robust research.