Brazilian higher education institutions face mounting challenges as predatory journals increasingly target researchers operating under intense publication pressures. The country’s evaluation systems, centered on metrics from agencies like CAPES and CNPq, emphasize output volume, creating fertile ground for exploitative publishing practices that prioritize fees over rigorous peer review.
The Publish-or-Perish Culture in Brazilian Academia
Brazilian academics navigate a demanding landscape shaped by national evaluation frameworks. The Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) uses the Qualis system to classify journals and assess graduate programs, while the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) maintains the Lattes Platform for tracking researcher productivity. These mechanisms tie career advancement, funding, and institutional rankings directly to publication counts, fostering a high-pressure environment where quantity often overshadows quality.
Researchers at universities across the country, from federal institutions like the University of São Paulo to regional colleges, report feeling compelled to publish frequently to secure promotions, grants, and program accreditation. This dynamic mirrors global trends but carries unique local dimensions due to Brazil’s large research community and reliance on public funding.
Understanding Predatory Journals
Predatory journals operate as deceptive outlets that charge authors article processing charges (APCs) while providing minimal or no legitimate peer review. They often mimic established titles, fabricate impact factors, and use aggressive email campaigns to solicit submissions. Unlike legitimate open-access models, these publications prioritize revenue, resulting in low-quality or even fabricated research entering the scholarly record.
In Brazil, the issue intersects with national databases and evaluation systems, allowing some questionable journals to gain Qualis classification and thereby attract submissions from career-conscious academics.
Recent Research Highlights the Scale
A comprehensive 2026 study published in Scientometrics surveyed over a thousand Brazilian researchers, revealing that publication pressure strongly correlates with experience in predatory outlets. Approximately 15 percent of validated respondents reported direct encounters with such practices. The research, drawing on responses verified through the Lattes Platform, underscores how federal universities appear particularly exposed compared to state or private counterparts.
Earlier analyses of publication data from 2000 to 2015 showed predatory articles representing a small but rapidly growing share of Brazilian output, with numbers tripling in certain periods. Infiltration into CAPES evaluation lists has amplified the problem, as researchers seek compliant venues for career progression.
Photo by Rain Bennett on Unsplash
Who Falls Victim and Why
Contrary to assumptions that only early-career scholars are susceptible, studies indicate experienced researchers also engage with predatory journals. Senior academics facing grant renewals or program evaluations sometimes opt for quick publication routes. Federal institutions, bound by stringent national metrics, show higher vulnerability rates.
Geographic uniformity across Brazil points to systemic factors rather than regional differences. Spam emails promising rapid review and indexing remain primary entry points, exploiting time constraints and metric-driven incentives.
Consequences for Researchers and Institutions
Publishing in predatory venues wastes public resources through APC payments often funded by grants and erodes individual reputations when low-quality work surfaces. Institutions risk compromised rankings and diminished trust in their research output. Broader implications include distorted scientific literature that can mislead policy and future studies.
Retractions and re-evaluations become necessary when questionable papers gain traction, adding administrative burdens to already stretched university systems.
Systemic Factors Amplifying the Issue
Brazil’s Qualis/CAPES framework, while intended to promote quality, has inadvertently created loopholes. Journals with questionable practices have secured classifications, incentivizing submissions. Combined with the emphasis on international visibility and English-language publications, this environment rewards speed over scrutiny.
Public funding agencies like CNPq inadvertently support the cycle when grant money covers APCs for low-standards outlets.
Awareness Gaps and Training Needs
Surveys reveal widespread difficulty among Brazilian academics in distinguishing legitimate journals from predatory ones. Many researchers lack formal training on journal selection criteria, impact metrics, and red flags such as unsolicited invitations or unverifiable editorial boards.
Universities and graduate programs could integrate dedicated modules on ethical publishing into curricula to build resilience across career stages.
Photo by Kolby Milton on Unsplash
Pathways Toward Solutions
Reforms to evaluation systems that prioritize research quality, societal impact, and open-access models offer promising directions. Diamond open access initiatives, supported by institutions rather than author fees, reduce financial incentives for predation. Enhanced screening of journals within Qualis and greater transparency in CAPES processes could limit infiltration.
International collaborations and tools from organizations monitoring predatory practices provide additional safeguards. Brazilian researchers benefit from resources emphasizing verified indexing and rigorous peer review standards.
Looking Ahead for Brazilian Higher Education
Addressing predatory publishing requires coordinated action among universities, funding bodies, and regulatory agencies. By shifting focus from sheer publication volume to meaningful contributions, Brazil can strengthen its research ecosystem and protect scholars from exploitation.
Continued monitoring through studies and platform updates will be essential as the academic landscape evolves.