Abstract

Despite the efforts of the academic community to solve predatory journals, the problem of predatory journals persists. In order to fundamentally solve the issue, collaboration and understanding between the various stakeholders involved in predatory journals is essential. The purpose of this study is to explore one of the key stakeholders in the predatory journals issue: Academic Librarians. To achieve this, interviews were conducted with five academic librarians who had experience regarding predatory journals. The narratives were analysed using Giorgi’s (1970) methods of phenomenological analysis and interpretive narrative analysis. The results show that the academic librarians’ experiences regarding predatory journals were organized into 11 categories of meaning structure. In-depth analyses show that the librarians’ perceived identity as subject specialists had a significant impact on the position of the predatory journal service. Librarians with a strong professional identity as subject specialists were more likely to provide predatory journal services based on greater responsibility and mission, and to adopt strategies for self-improvement. In contrast, those who felt confused about their identity as subject specialist were more likely to provide predatory journal services passively or to focus on pragmatic traditional library work. The findings of this study are significant in that they explore the issue of predatory journals in relation to the professional values of subject specialist librarians, which has important implications for future service design in libraries.