Cloned and hijacked journals: how the scam works, and how to spot it

Most publishing scams ask you to believe in a reputation that was never earned. A hijacked journal is more cunning: it asks you to believe in a reputation that genuinely exists — just not for the website in front of you. Fraudsters take a real, often respectable journal, copy its name, its ISSN and its look, register a convincing web address, and collect submissions and fees from authors who are certain they are dealing with the authentic title. The counterfeit is sometimes called a cloned or hijacked journal, and the independent Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker — the reference register for documented cases — had grown past 450 entries by mid-2026. This guide is a companion to our complete guide to identifying a predatory or cloned journal, focused entirely on the clone.

What a hijacked journal actually is

It helps to be precise, because "predatory" and "hijacked" are often used interchangeably and they are not the same. A predatory journal is typically its own low-quality operation trading under its own name. A hijacked journal is impersonation: it has no identity of its own and survives entirely by wearing another journal's. The target is usually a legitimate journal that is vulnerable in one specific way — it may be print-only or have a thin web presence, it may publish in a language other than English, it may be a society journal whose domain registration lapsed, or it may simply be indexed somewhere prestigious while being obscure enough that few authors know its real website. The counterfeit fills that gap online and intercepts the traffic.

How the scam is built

The construction follows a pattern. First, the operators choose a target with recognised indexing — a title that appears in a database like Scopus or the Web of Science Master Journal List — because that indexing is the reputation they intend to borrow. Second, they secure a web address: sometimes a freshly registered lookalike domain, sometimes an expired domain that once belonged to the real journal. Third, they clone the surface — the masthead, the aims and scope, frequently the real editorial board's names lifted without consent. Fourth, they solicit: mass emails invite submissions, promise rapid publication, and quote an article-processing charge. Payments and manuscripts flow to the impostor, while the genuine journal often has no idea its name is being used. Some operations go further and manage to get their counterfeit content associated with the borrowed indexing, which is why the damage can outlast the discovery.

Why it defeats an ordinary check

The reflexive checks most authors run are exactly the ones a clone is designed to pass. Search the title? It is a real title, so it appears. Look up the ISSN? It is a real ISSN, so it resolves. See whether the journal is indexed? The name is indexed, because the real journal is. Each check confirms the reputation the fraudster borrowed, not the website that contacted you. This is the single most important idea in the whole subject: verifying a journal's name and number does not establish that the website in your inbox belongs to the publisher of record. The clone lives precisely in the gap between a legitimate identity and an illegitimate address.

Five checks that expose a clone

1. Reach the journal the other way round. Never navigate from the email you received. Open the indexing service — Scopus or the Web of Science Master Journal List — directly, find the title there, and follow the link to the publisher's address of record. That address is your reference truth for everything below.

2. Compare the web address, character by character. Place the address of record beside the address that solicited you and read them slowly. Impersonating sites may differ through an added or dropped word, a country suffix, a hyphen or another domain variation. Any unexplained mismatch is a stop-and-verify condition; document it and confirm the publisher address through an authoritative record.

3. Resolve recent persistent identifiers. Test two or three recent DOI links from the site. A DOI may be registered through Crossref or another registration agency and should resolve to the expected article record. Non-resolution or a publisher mismatch is a material identity concern that requires investigation; it does not, by itself, prove that the site is a clone.

4. Read the domain's age against the journal's age. A journal that claims decades of history but sits on a domain registered a few months ago is telling you something its homepage will not. Public "who-is" lookups show when a domain was first registered.

5. Check the register. Look the title up in the Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker, which documents reported impersonations and publishes its methods. A listing is evidence of a documented concern requiring verification; absence is not clearance, because any register can be incomplete or delayed.

The comparison I never skip

When someone sends me a suspect invitation, the check I trust above all others takes about thirty seconds: I find the journal through Web of Science or Scopus myself, copy the publisher's real web address, and set it next to the address in the email. In the great majority of clone cases the answer is visible right there, in a domain that is one character or one word off. Everything else — the DOIs, the domain age, the register — I use to confirm what that comparison already suggests. I have learned to distrust my own eyes on a beautiful website and trust instead the boring, decisive fact of the address of record, because a clone can copy every pixel of a page but it cannot occupy the real journal's place in the index.

What to do if you spot one

If you identify a clone before submitting, the best response is simple: do not engage, and do not pay. If you can, alert the genuine journal — many have published warnings about impersonators and will want to know — and consider reporting it to the Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker so others are protected. If you have already submitted or paid, treat it as you would any fraud: stop further payments, document everything with dated screenshots, and read our companion guide on what to do if you have already published in a predatory journal. The clone's advantage depends on misplaced trust; checking the address of record and preserving the evidence materially reduces that advantage.

Want a fast evidence check on a specific title? Our free Journal Evidence Checker flags known hijacked ISSNs and links you to records to compare. Choosing a suitable journal for a specific manuscript is also part of what we do.

Verification sources: the Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker and its published methods; Scopus content policy; the Web of Science Master Journal List; Crossref registration verification; and Think. Check. Submit. Accessed 4 August 2026. Confirm any decisive identity detail at the relevant primary source on the day you act.