Search results

Thousands of preprints related to Covid-19 have effused into the academic literature. Even though these are not peer-reviewed documents and have not been vetted by medical or other experts, several have been cited, while others have been widely promoted by the media. While many preprints eventually find their way into the published literature, usually through integrated publishing streams, there is a small body of preprints that have been opaquely withdrawn/retracted, without suitable reasons, leaving only a vestigial or skeletal record online. Others have, quite literally, vanished. This paper aims to examine some of those cases.

For peer-reviewed literature, a retracted academic paper is usually water-marked with “RETRACTED” across each page of the document, as recommended by ethical bodies such as the Committee on Publication Ethics, which represents thousands of journals and publishers. Curiously, even though pro-preprint groups claim that preprints are an integral part of the publication process and a scholarly instrument, there are no strict, detailed or established ethical guidelines for preprints on most preprint servers. This paper identifies select withdrawn/retracted preprints and emphasizes that the opaque removal of preprints from the scholarly record may constitute unscholarly, possibly even predatory or unethical, behavior.

Strict ethical guidelines are urgently needed for preprints, and preprint authors, in the case of misconduct, should face the same procedure and consequences as standard peer-reviewed academic literature.

Journals and publishers that have silently retracted or withdrawn preprints should reinstate them, as for regular retracted literature, except for highly exceptional cases.

The aims of this article are to describe the current status, usage, and acceptance of domestic preprint servers in mainland China by investigating three integrated preprint servers in mainland China. These are the Qiji e‐print archive (Qiji), the Chinese Preprint Server (CPS), Chinese Science Papers Online (CSPO).

This research gives a quantitative analysis of the submission numbers to three preprint servers, the subject distribution and citations. An investigation of university websites and their policies was also carried out.

Preprint submissions have a strong correlation with official promotion and policies. The preprints communication pattern in mainland China concentrates on the disciplines of physics, mathematics and computer science which reflects international preprint communication behaviour. As yet the domestic preprint servers in mainland China attract little attention from excellent scholars and have a low impact on scientific communication.

No author survey was conducted.

This is the first paper to characterize the usage and acceptance of domestic preprint servers in mainland China using a quantitative method.

It is unclear whether regional rather than global or discipline-focussed preprint platforms as an innovation in the communication of science are removing any of the barriers faced by researchers in the scientific periphery or whether they are increasing access to and visibility of science from the periphery. In response, this paper focusses on the uptake, visibility and academic impact of regional preprint publishing platforms in two peripheral regions (Africa and Latin America) to gain insights into the use and possible impact of regional preprint servers.

Comparative quantitative analysis using bibliometric and altmetric data to compare six preprint servers (two regional, one global and three discipline-specific).

There is evidence of the uptake of regional preprint servers, but the uptake is comparatively modest compared with global and discipline-focussed preprint servers. The academic and social visibility of preprints available on regional preprint servers is comparatively lower when compared to other preprint servers. The preprint server SciELO preprint in comparison to AfricArxiv shows signs of increasing growth and visibility, but more time is required to reach any definitive conclusions.

The research is limited by the short timeframe that the regional preprint servers have existed compared to some of the other preprint servers. The absence of reliable data on the research populations by region or globally by discipline places limits on the comparability of the raw data.

The article provides for the first time a detailed empirical analysis of the contribution of preprint servers targeted at researchers from the scientific periphery to global science.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0153

The recent proliferation of preprints could be a way for researchers worldwide to increase the availability and visibility of their research findings. Against the background of rising publication costs caused by the increasing prevalence of article processing fees, the search for other ways to publish research results besides traditional journal publication may increase. This could be especially true for lower-income countries.

Therefore, the authors are interested in the experiences and attitudes towards posting and using preprints in the Global South as opposed to the Global North. To explore whether motivations and concerns about posting preprints differ, the authors adopted a mixed-methods approach, combining a quantitative survey of researchers with focus group interviews.

The authors found that respondents from the Global South were more likely to agree to adhere to policies and to emphasise that mandates could change publishing behaviour towards open access. They were also more likely to agree posting preprints has a positive impact. Respondents from the Global South and the Global North emphasised the importance of peer-reviewed research for career advancement.

The study has identified a wide range of experiences with and attitudes towards posting preprints among researchers in the Global South and the Global North. To the authors' knowledge, this has hardly been studied before, which is also because preprints only have emerged lately in many disciplines and countries.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0181

A possibly novel application for microfiche is its use as the primary publication form for conference preprints. This concept is discussed with particular reference to its application at the Rotary‐wing aircraft symposium organized by the Institution of Engineers, Australia and Royal Aeronautical Society and held in Melbourne, Australia, 24th September 1973. A questionnaire seeking to ascertain user reaction to the microfiche preprints was circulated to 119 people who attended the symposium and/or received copies of the preprints. The responses to this questionnaire have been analysed and user acceptability of microfiche preprints of postprints has been investigated in relation to timeliness, accessibility of a microfiche reader/printer, prior awareness and use of microfiche, cost, and the effect of form on preprint reading habits.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss whether preprint servers are a disruptive technology for science, librarians or information seeking among the general population.

This column explores what preprint servers are, how they are used in the world of science, how their usage changed in response to the deluge of COVID-19 related research papers and how they might impact the work of librarians and society in general.

Preprint servers are not a highly disruptive technology, but they do challenge both scientists and librarians to understand them better, use the information they find on them with care and educate society in general on topics such as peer review and the importance of using well-vetted, good quality science in making important decisions.

Up until the past year and a half, only a small segment of the librarian profession needed to be concerned with preprint servers. With the increasing presence of references to non-peer-reviewed articles from preprint servers in popular media reports, most librarians now need to know something about this technology. It is also useful to consider how the technology might benefit and create challenges for their work.

Preprint has become an important vehicle for academic communications and discussions. However, in preprint, there is a lack of a sufficient quality control mechanism such as peer review, which is a proven quality assurance practice that is used in traditional academic publishing services. To address the problem leveraging on the power of this practice, the authors introduce into preprint a self-organizing peer review method by applying the concept of token economy and the blockchain technology.

Specifically, this paper proposes an idea that applies the token economy concept to the design of the incentive and penalty mechanisms for peer reviewers in preprint to assure the qualities of its publications. Steemit has been studied to demonstrate the characteristics of the mechanisms.

A token economy-enhanced framework for self-organizing peer review in preprint is also proposed. The resulting preprint system is an academic community-oriented, self-organizing and blockchain-based content publishing system that is designed to run on both permissioned and permissionless blockchains.

First, since peer review is on a voluntary basis and not profits oriented, the “monetary” incentive and penalty mechanisms borrowed from Steemit may conflict with academic ethics. Second, the authors proposed to deploy the authors’ token economy on blockchain, but the current mainstream decentralized blockchain services are too few to warrant a foreseeable successful future for the authors’ application. In fact, as the flagship of blockchain 2.0, the Ethereum blockchain suffers from the problem of scalability, which leads to its applications' lower performances, longer response times and eventually more negative user experiences as time goes by. Finally, the authors’ proposed version of preprint has not been implemented, and hence, its practical effectiveness and acceptance by academia are yet to be evaluated.

In this paper, the authors proposed a token economy-based framework for self-organizing peer review in preprint leveraging on blockchain technology. This framework encourages positive interactions between authors and reviewers, which helps to establish a healthy academic ecology that produces more contents with better qualities. Application of a solution based on the authors’ framework should impact the current academic communities by offering a new academic peer reviewing tool that has a built-in mechanism for self-behavior correction and quality assurance.

Through adaption, the framework can be applied to other domains as well. In such domains, a large amount of feedbacks from partakers are needed and there exists a tremendous amount of work to filter noises in feedbacks so as to ensure that as many the quality ones as possible are delivered for a variety of purposes. The authors’ framework essentially impacts almost all domains where there exists a need to collect and filter large amount of feedbacks, and using the authors’ framework-based solution is cost-saving, which can be seen as a major potential contribution of the research.

The incentive and penalty mechanisms encourage positive interactions between authors and reviewers, and it helps to establish a healthy academic ecology that produces high-volume contents with good qualities.

This paper briefly focuses on the implementation of the ICTP Scientific Preprints Repository Online and on the recent Web service for a One‐Shot World Wide Preprints Search. Reviewed here are the strategies adopted and the effective results attained after a trial period of more than two years.

Chemists communicate in structures. The nature of information available to chemists therefore has to take this into account. With the migration from print to electronic publication nearly complete, the Internet offers the chemical information user many advantages. Journal articles are accessible quickly and easily from the desktop, long before their appearance in paper form. Additionally, research papers can now be uploaded to preprint servers before they even enter the publishing process. This paper discusses the many advantages this brings with it for chemists, but also discusses the disadvantages some may see as a possible result.

This study investigates how important the preprint arXiv is for Slovenian scientists, whether there are differences between scientific disciplines and the reputation of arXiv among Slovenian scientists. We are also interested in what advantages and disadvantages scientists see in using arXiv.

A voluntary sample of active researchers from the scientific fields covered by arXiv was used. Data were collected over 21 days in September 2021 using a 40-question online survey. In addition to descriptive statistics, nonparametric statistical methods such as Pearson's chi-squared test for independence, Kruskal-Wallis' H-test and Mann-Whitney's U-test were applied to the collected data.

Among Slovenian scientists there is a wide range of different users of arXiv. The authors note differences among scientific disciplines. Physicists and astronomers are the most engaged, followed by mathematicians. Researchers in computer science, electrical engineering and systems science seem to have recognized the benefits of the archive, but are still hesitant to use it. Researchers from the other scientific fields participated in the survey to a lesser extent, suggesting that arXiv is less popular in these scientific fields. For Slovenian scientists, the main advantages of arXiv are faster access to knowledge, open access, greater impact of scientists' work and the fact that publishing in the archive is free of charge. A negative aspect of using the archive is the frustration caused by the difficulties in assessing the credibility of articles.

A voluntary sample was used, which attracted a larger number of researchers but has a higher risk of sampling bias.

The results are useful for international comparisons, but also provide bases and recommendations for institutional and national policies to evaluate researchers and their performance.

The results provide valuable insights into arXiv usage habits and the reasons for using or not using arXiv by Slovenian scientists. There is no comparable study conducted in Slovenia.