Preprinting helps accelerate dissemination of scientific knowledge. To what extent do researchers adopt preprinting? And how does this vary by discipline and region?

Together with Narmin Rzayeva and @stephenpinfield, I just published an article answering these questions. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/xdwc4_v2

@cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio

OSF

Our work shows there are still lots of opportunities for growth in preprinting.

Math and physics demonstrate what can be achieved when preprinting becomes the norm. Other disciplines still need to make significant efforts to reach this point.

Asia and Africa are lagging behind compared to many other regions, in particular North America and Western and Northern Europe. Lot of room for growth in preprinting in Asia and Africa.

Our bibliometric analysis combines data from #Dimensions, @OpenAlex and @crossref.

Availability of reliable data on links between peer-reviewed outputs and preprints is limited. Our statistics provide a conservative estimate of preprint adoption. The actual adoption is somewhat higher.

In ideal world, journals would ask authors whether their article has been preprinted. If it has, the journal article would link back to the preprint, both on the journal website and in the underlying metadata.

I'd love to work on this with publishers!

There are lots of interesting additional analyses that can be performed based on our work. Unfortunately, we cannot share all data we used, but what can be shared is available in Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15301958.

Hope it will be of use!

Supporting Data and Scripts for "Adoption of Preprinting Across Scientific Disciplines and Geographical Regions (1991–2023)" by Narmin Rzayeva, Stephen Pinfield, and Ludo Waltman

To support the reproducibility of the research findings presented in the paper, this repository includes the data and scripts used in the analysis. The "Data" folder contains the datasets underlying the results reported in the publication. The "Scripts" folder includes the SQL scripts used to process and analyze the data. Both folders contain README files with detailed explanations of the included files and their structure. All files are provided in open file formats to ensure broad accessibility and long-term usability.

Zenodo
@LudoWaltman Yes. And ideally this should be part of a PID-linked output cloud of projects, tying together proposal, data, code, posters, preprints, articles, video, blogpost etc. That could/should be visible on the landing pages of any of the items involved. It would be nice if any steps to do the reciprocal preprint<>article link would be done in such a way that it would fit that bigger, longer term goal.

@jeroenbosman @LudoWaltman

I can easily see this getting done in #OJS. Technically it would not be difficult, it's just a DOI saved. The relation could be published via OAI-PMH as JATS. I think this is what @juancommander is harvesting.

With @essepuntato we from the @komet project are working on improving OJS metadata dissemination. We won't be able to add preprints, I guess. But we are working in that direction.

@hauschke Yes, this is very technically possible. I think the better way to implement this would be through the Notify Protocol, but we've yet to see that widely adopted. @jeroenbosman @LudoWaltman @essepuntato @komet

@LudoWaltman in an ideal world, predatory scientific journals would not exist. Or scholars would seriously #boycott them.
In an ideal world scientific journals are diamond open access (DOAJ: https://doaj.org/) so that #knowledge produced by #universities would be available without additional costs to whom pay, i.e. every citizen via the taxes.

#science #ScientificJournals #OpenAccess #DiamondOpenAccess
Ping @DOAJ @academia_carnet

Directory of Open Access Journals – DOAJ

DOAJ is a unique and extensive index of diverse open access journals from around the world, driven by a growing community, committed to ensuring quality content is freely available online for everyone.

@LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio An under-appreciated factor in the early adoption of preprints by the physical and mathematical sciences was I believe the introduction of TeX for typesetting the mathematics in preprints. Once scientists realised that they could do their own typesetting the journals lost one of their main selling points.

https://council.science/publications/normalization-preprints/

#Preprints #OpenScience

The normalization of preprints - International Science Council

An ISC Occasional paper by Luke Drury.

International Science Council
@Luke_Drury Interesting point, Luke, thanks!
@Luke_Drury @LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio maybe Markdown can do the same for other fields? Big fan of MyST for typesetting now.
@Luke_Drury @LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio I think it's impossible to overstate the importance of TeX in this. The failure to adopt it is why we in palaeo are still so far behind.
@LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio I am surprised it is only 50 % in physics. Astrophysics is probably higher than that. Maybe the other 50% are very low impact papers?
@hfalcke @LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio It is certainly much higher in astrophysics and theoretical physics, but people working in material science for example do not have the same preprint culture - there are many different branches of physics with different traditions and norms.

@Luke_Drury @hfalcke @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio

There are indeed major differences between fields in the physical sciences, with Astronomical and Space Sciences as well as Quantum Physics having the highest preprint adoption, followed by Atomic, Molecular, Nuclear, Particle and Plasma Physics. See the figure below for more details.

Note: Field definitions are based on the Fields of Research (FoR) classification in #Dimensions.

@LudoWaltman @hfalcke @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio Fascinating! and would seem to support my suggestion of a correlation with the use of TeX/LaTeX?
@LudoWaltman @Luke_Drury @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio Interesting. That is indeed much closer to what I would have expected. Thanks.

@hfalcke @LudoWaltman @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio This data is from 2017, but even then astronomy papers using ESO data were being posted on the arXiv well over 90% of the time and I doubt that it has dropped since.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.03366

@Luke_Drury @hfalcke @stephenpinfield @cwts @RoRInstitute @ASAPbio

Over 90%, that's really impressive, a great example for other fields!