VULNERABILITIES TO BLINDPREDATION IN INFORMATION FLOWS

Abstract

The integrity of scientific editorial processes has been challenged by vulnerabilities embedded in the information flows that support peer review and the validation of scientific knowledge. In this context, blindpredation emerges as a phenomenon associated with the exploitation of informational weaknesses within blind review environments, compromising the transparency, impartiality, and reliability of editorial processes. This study aims to systematize informational vulnerabilities associated with blindpredation in blind peer-review workflows, proposing a matrix as an instrument for diagnosing, visualizing, and mitigating such risks. The study is theoretical in nature, adopting a qualitative approach based on literature review and conceptual analysis. The theoretical framework articulates the Data–Information–Knowledge–Wisdom hierarchy, studies on information flows, and principles of information traceability applied to scholarly communication. As a result, six dimensions of vulnerability distributed throughout the editorial workflow were identified: informational opacity, institutional silos, information asymmetry, reputational capture, lack of traceability, and identity capture risk. Based on this systematization, the VIBE-P Matrix was developed as an instrument that enables the mapping of points of greater exposure to blindpredation across different stages of the editorial process. The findings indicate that informational vulnerabilities are unevenly distributed throughout the editorial workflow, concentrating primarily in the blind review and editorial decision stages, and that traceability constitutes an important mechanism for strengthening information governance and the integrity of scholarly communication.