Abstract
In recent years, a growing body of academic, technical, and non-academic literature on research and education in Central Asia has provided an interesting case for examining publication strategies commonly associated with questionable practices. This study aims to reveal forward-looking researchers’ motivations for using predatory journals and publication intermediaries to advance their academic careers or retain existing positions in response to increasing pressure to publish. The study employs a game-theoretical model as an analytical framework as appropriate to address this objective. The results indicate that unprepared academic staff with rational expectations, under equilibrium conditions, are likely to maximise their personal utility while avoiding the risky decision of submitting articles to higher-quality journals. A concerning implication that emerges from interpreting these publication strategies is the widespread motivation to choose undesirable actions arising under certain plausible conditions faced by local researchers. Predatory publishing, plagiarism, and ghostwriting occur as significant indicators of dishonesty in academia, which ultimately lead to the waste of national investments in education and research. While not necessarily illegal, they are certainly not ethical and might even border on corrupt practices. Whether these amount to corruption can be subject to debate, but many anti-corruption measures already implemented in other sectors can be applied to prevent academic dishonesty. From a policymaking perspective, the findings of this study may inform administrators seeking to design more effective incentive structures to enhance staff productivity and participation in developing countries.