Overview of project
There are now a range of services focussed on preprints including preprint peer review, highlighting, podcasts and news coverage. However, we do not know what, if any, impact this coverage has on the preprint itself. Therefore, we are investigating how such services impact the citations, publication, reads and Altmetric scores of preprints.
Collaborators
- Our current collaborators will be listed here as the project progresses
Funding
Any funding tied to this project will be listed here
Background
Preprints offer numerous benefits to authors in the form of increased attention, citations and impact. Additionally, they benefit authors in terms of careers and opportunities. Preprints enable a more equitable scientific ecosystem and represent a viable route to meaningful change in academic publishing.
As preprint use increases, additional services are also rapidly rising and increasing in their adoption. For example, preprint peer review has been increasing since ~2017. Services such as preLights (launched in 2018) provide a curation & highlighting service for preprints with the aim of increasing awareness. Other curation efforts, such as The Node and other venues equally aim to collate relevant preprints.
However, to date nobody has assessed the impact of these services on the preprints themselves. Given the perceived importance of peer review in publishing, It would be reasonable to assume that a peer reviewed preprint may have higher citations than a non-peer reviewed preprint. Curation efforts could also result in a greater trust in a given preprint. Additionally, this extra attention, from peer review or curation, could translate into increased total views or citations for given preprints.
Rippling Ideas 