There are more and more quality papers in my opinion. That said, we are now collectively aware of more and more poor quality papers thanks to the speed of the

There are more and more quality papers in my opinion. That said, we are now collectively aware of more and more poor quality papers thanks to the speed of the internet and the ease with which anyone can search for subject and throw up a paper without regard for quality. It's worth noting that the source here is a dubious "research publisher" paper mill described as: They’re quasi-predatory. Maybe not as bad as MDPI, but engaging in many of the same practices: inflation of special issues, startlingly fast review times, and from other commenters it seems they’re also ignoring reviewers so they can publish more articles and bring in the APCs. Like MDPI, you can find good articles in Frontiers papers - one of my go to’s for interrupted time series is in a Frontiers journal - but as time goes on and knowledge of their shadiness spreads, you’ll be better served not having your name associated with them. here in r/AskAcademia : https://old.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/179bnvv/how_are_frontiers_journals_viewed_in_the_academic/ https://old.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/179bnvv/how_ar...