Critical Rebuttal to the Misrepresentation of WSEAS in the IDEA 2017 Report ("Predatory Journals in Scopus")

Several of our Czech colleagues have brought to our attention a publication available at [1]. We wish to express our concern regarding the inclusion of references to WSEAS in this publication. These references are factually incorrect and misleading. In reality, WSEAS has no connection to the content or context described. The report, titled “Predatory Journals in Scopus: Evidence on Cross-country Differences”, was published in 2017 by the IDEA think tank affiliated with CERGE-EI. It categorized several journals and publishers as “predatory” or of questionable quality. Among them was the World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS), which was listed alongside known predatory outlets—without sufficient evidence or scholarly justification. This categorization has understandably caused concern within the academic community, particularly among authors, reviewers, and editorial board members associated with WSEAS. The present article seeks to refute the claims made in the IDEA publication, demonstrating that the inclusion of WSEAS in such a list is factually inaccurate, methodologically flawed, and damaging to its reputation.