Abstract
Predatory publishing practices undermine the credibility of scientific research, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Despite international concern, little is known about how researchers themselves perceive and respond to this phenomenon – especially in post-Soviet contexts such as the Republic of Moldova. This study aims to explore Moldovan researchers’ awareness, experiences and attitudes towards predatory journals and conferences, as well as to identify potential policy and educational interventions to combat such practices. A quantitative, descriptive survey was conducted among researchers, PhD candidates, supervisors and academic staff in Moldova using a standardised online questionnaire. A total of 539 valid responses were collected. Descriptive statistics and thematic coding of open responses were employed to analyse the data. While over 85% of respondents had heard of predatory journals, only 68% were aware of predatory conferences. Senior researchers and those holding scientific titles demonstrated higher awareness and confidence in recognising such outlets. However, 25% of respondents reported uncertainty about whether they had previously published in or attended a predatory event. Key motivators for engaging with such platforms included pressure to publish for career advancement, faster publication timelines and limited awareness of predatory characteristics. These patterns indicate that the structural logic of the national academic system – focused on quantitative outputs – is the primary catalyst for the persistence of predatory publishing. Notably, most respondents recognised the negative impact of such practices on academic reputation, research quality and public trust. Educational interventions and checklist-based guidance were identified as preferred solutions, alongside calls for reforming national research evaluation criteria. The study showed that the Moldovan academic community is significantly aware of predatory publishing but lacks adequate institutional mechanisms for prevention and support. Targeted educational programmes, structural reforms and improved publication literacy are urgently needed to reduce systemic vulnerability.