Think. Check. Submit.

Think. Check. Submit.
Name	Think. Check. Submit.
Formation	2015
Type	Advocacy campaign
Headquarters	Geneva

Think. Check. Submit. is an international campaign and checklist initiative that guides researchers, authors, and librarians in evaluating journals and publishers before submitting manuscripts. It offers a concise set of criteria intended to distinguish reputable outlets from deceptive or low-quality journals and publishers, aligning with broader efforts in scholarly communication reform, research integrity, and information literacy. The campaign has been referenced by academic publishers, professional societies, and national libraries as part of initiatives addressing predatory publishing and publication ethics.

Overview

Think. Check. Submit. presents a three-step mnemonic and checklist used by academics, librarians, funders, and institutions to assess where to publish. It has been adopted by organizations including the Committee on Publication Ethics, World Health Organization, European Research Council, Wellcome Trust, National Institutes of Health, and Association of American Universities, and is recommended alongside resources from Directory of Open Access Journals, Council of Science Editors, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and International Council for Science. Materials emphasize verifying editorial boards, peer review processes, indexing in databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, and checking publisher memberships like Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association and CrossRef.

History and development

The campaign originated from discussions among librarians, publishers, and academic stakeholders in response to controversies involving journals exposed in sting operations and investigations by outlets such as Science and Nature. Early collaborators included representatives from International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, National Information Standards Organization, and university libraries at institutions like University of Oxford, Harvard University, University of Toronto, and National University of Singapore. Think. Check. Submit. launched its public-facing materials with support from funders such as Wellcome Trust and national research agencies including UK Research and Innovation and Dutch Research Council.

The project evolved through workshops held at conferences including International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions meetings and PLOS conferences, incorporating feedback from editors at Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley-Blackwell, and independent society publishers such as Royal Society and American Chemical Society. Subsequent iterations added multilingual resources influenced by initiatives from UNESCO, European Commission, and regional consortia in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Purpose and criteria

Think. Check. Submit. aims to provide actionable guidance to avoid deceptive publishers implicated in cases highlighted by journalists from The New York Times, The Guardian, Reuters, and investigative teams at COPE and Retraction Watch. The checklist advises authors to check editorial policies, peer review transparency, article processing charges, and permanence policies referencing standards from Committee on Publication Ethics, identifiers from ORCID, and metadata practices involving DOI registration by CrossRef. Suggested criteria align with indexing expectations in databases such as EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ERIC, and with guidelines from funders including National Science Foundation and European Research Council.

The campaign underscores distinctions between legitimate open access outlets like those participating in Directory of Open Access Journals and questionable entities flagged in lists maintained by platforms such as Cabells and watchdog reporting by Science. It encourages consultation with university offices, librarians at British Library or Library of Congress, and professional organizations such as International Council for Science and Association of Research Libraries.

Implementation and outreach

Implementation strategies include online checklists, printable flowcharts, workshops, webinars, and integration into author training programs at universities including Stanford University, University of Melbourne, McGill University, and University of Cape Town. Outreach partnerships have involved learned societies such as Royal Society of Chemistry, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and American Physical Society, as well as library networks like Consortium of European Research Libraries and national consortia including Jisc.

Think. Check. Submit. resources have been translated into multiple languages through collaborations with UNESCO, regional bodies like African Academy of Sciences, and initiatives by national research councils including Spanish Research Council and National Research Foundation (South Africa). Training integrates case studies derived from investigations in Nature, Science Advances, and policy reports by OECD and European Commission.

Impact and reception

The campaign is cited in guidance from research funders such as Wellcome Trust and European Research Council and in institutional policies at universities like University of Cambridge and Yale University as part of research integrity toolkits. Evaluations by librarians documented in journals including Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, College & Research Libraries, and Learned Publishing report increased author awareness and incorporation into author workflows. Critics argue that checklists cannot substitute for systemic reforms advocated by organizations like Alliance of Learned and Professional Society Publishers and commentators in The Lancet and BMJ, who call for more robust oversight, auditing, and transparent metrics.

Despite critiques, the campaign is broadly regarded as a practical educational resource referenced alongside indexing services such as Web of Science and Scopus, metadata agencies like CrossRef, researcher identifier systems like ORCID, and integrity bodies including Committee on Publication Ethics.

Category:Publishing